The mystery of Dad's sporterized Enfield

[cheapshot]

Dad passed away last year, and in his gun collection was an Enfield he had sporterized in his much younger days. I ended up with it, and was thinking that although it was a staple in his gun rack, I had in fact, never seen him shoot it. I think I have figured out why by reading threads in this section. You have to love the internet and the combined knowledge it exposes you to.

I'm pretty sure that this was originally a Herter's kit. He was a big Herter's fan and in the early 60s, you could buy all the stuff to do this on a very tight budget, which would have caught his attention. Dad had a habit of putting failures off to the side when they didn't work after messing with them a bit. The goal for today was to take this thing out and fire a couple downrange to see if the "fat" barrel bore it potentially has is enough slop to make a relatively inaccurate mess with factory 30-06. The weather isn't cooperating with this first part, so I'll likely have the barrel slugged before actually accomplishing this feat. It will tell me a story though.

This is the beginning of a journey for me with multiple paths. I'm sure I will have a lot of questions asked as I turn this old timer into the effective shooter it could be. It also looks like my recent windfall will pretty much get spent on bullet molds. This is where the story begins.

[RustyReel]

Gotta have a picture or two.

[cheapshot]

Here you go.

[tdoor4570]

Looks like a sportered P-17 need better pic of action to tell for sure, if it is and the barrel is good you will have a good shooter

[opos]

Looks about like the one I had made back in the late '50's while going to college and working in a small gun shop..the stock looks like a Fagan stock..the one I had literally fed our young family for a number of years...have no idea how many deer, elk and antelope it accounted for but plenty....I love the old school "sporters"...I don't cut up anything any more but when things like that were $20 and parts were cheap it made a wonderful way to have a sporter without trying to get something expensive like an FN or later on the Weatherby and SAKO hunting rifles...

Sears carried a whole line of "price" big game rifles built on Mauser, model 70 and 1917 Enfield actions..they bought barrelled actions (New old stock or re arsenal ones)..had a company in Chicago do the metal work and restocked them with something like a 'value" Bishop stock....the picture included is a 30-06 Enfield Sears sporter...I think they sold for about $50 via catalog and in the stores....trying to compete with the "high priced" rifles.

[cheapshot]

Yep, it's a P17. That part I've got. Just need to solve the mystery of why it became a rack queen.

[cheapshot]

Looks about like the one I had made back in the late '50's while going to college and working in a small gun shop..the stock looks like a Fagan stock..the one I had literally fed our young family for a number of years...have no idea how many deer, elk and antelope it accounted for but plenty....I love the old school "sporters"...I don't cut up anything any more but when things like that were $20 and parts were cheap it made a wonderful way to have a sporter without trying to get something expensive like an FN or later on the Weatherby and SAKO hunting rifles...

Sears carried a whole line of "price" big game rifles built on Mauser, model 70 and 1917 Enfield actions..they bought barrelled actions (New old stock or re arsenal ones)..had a company in Chicago do the metal work and restocked them with something like a 'value" Bishop stock....the picture included is a 30-06 Enfield Sears sporter...I think they sold for about $50 via catalog and in the stores....trying to compete with the "high priced" rifles.

I saw the Fagan stock online and think you are right there. The stock was never seal finished, which was very odd. Dad was a woodworker, he knew the game. Never talked about the gun, and I never really asked. The rest all made sense in some way or another. This replaced a .30-40 will a barrel that had seen better days, then was replaced by a .243, which was replaced by a Remington 742 in .30-06 back in the 70s. As a kid, it was just "how it was." Even as an adult, this just sat there. It's heavy, of course, but most of his guns got a few shots run through them every few years, if not at least by one of the kids. This one didn't. Heck, he used the 243 to take out a woodchuck from the front door at about 100 yards. I couldn't even see it with my glasses. He was so far sighted he had it right away. I didn't see it until the body flipped back from impact.

[Texas by God]

As you dive into it keep us updated. People say Win & Rem are better than Eddystone but I've only had an Eddy and it was a fine rifle. The US rifle model of 1917 was only built in 1917&1918 yet they are still going strong. They are an overbuilt action which results in a heavy sporter but a good one. It shouldn't take much to get it shooting to please.
Best, Thomas.

[opos]

To add to the post I made above....my love of the rifle is not dead...the one I mentioned I'd hunted with for many years got sold when I left Colorado and put my hunting on hold...a few years back i got the "hankerin" for another 1917 and picked up an absolute beauty of a conversion to 25-06 with a Douglas barrel and mocifications like "cock on opening", etc....it's a real solid tack driver...just use it for target shooting and to have a nice accurate rifle to load for..just a perfect blend of "the old days" and something that will shoot with most of the others out there.

[cheapshot]

To add to the post I made above....my love of the rifle is not dead...the one I mentioned I'd hunted with for many years got sold when I left Colorado and put my hunting on hold...a few years back i got the "hankerin" for another 1917 and picked up an absolute beauty of a conversion to 25-06 with a Douglas barrel and mocifications like "cock on opening", etc....it's a real solid tack driver...just use it for target shooting and to have a nice accurate rifle to load for..just a perfect blend of "the old days" and something that will shoot with most of the others out there.

Wow, that's beautiful. I have a lot to learn. The rest are easy in comparison.

[RedJackson]

Stock looks Herters (roll over cheekpiece)
Floor plate appears to have been straightened. (good)
Outside of the long barrel the P17 was a better battle rifle than the 03 as it had usable sights.
Back when, many were converted to the big belted magnums as no other action could do it as cheaply.
No reason why it should not shoot well if the bedding is correct and the bore excellent.

[texasnative46]

cheapshot,

You should carefully measure the bore, as any number of "American Enfields" were bored out by the British Home Guard during early WWII to accept .303 British bullets, with nothing else changed.

I have one of those "reamed out to .303 British" rifles that shoots better than I can hold it, once we figured out what it was.

yours, tex

[mac1911]

What's on top for a scope. Looks like a Lyman Alaskan ?
You can slug the bore and or a chamber casting to be sure of what you have.
As far as guns that don't get used....it's either a malfunction and the decision it's not worth fixing or something just bugged him about that rifle.

[RustyReel]

Probably a Herter's stock, or maybe just the buttplate and grip cap. Not sure what else would be in the Herter's "kit"?? maybe the rings and possibly the scope....nothing wrong with that. Have you removed the scope and bases and made certain it is a 1917 and not a P14. From the picture it could be either. The p14's were in 303 British.

Also pretty common to find these rechambered to such things a 308 Norma and 300 Win Mags. Unless you were left with something that tells you it really is a 30/06 you should probably do a chamber cast before you shoot it.

[cheapshot]

Probably a Herter's stock, or maybe just the buttplate and grip cap. Not sure what else would be in the Herter's "kit"?? maybe the rings and possibly the scope....nothing wrong with that. Have you removed the scope and bases and made certain it is a 1917 and not a P14. From the picture it could be either. The p14's were in 303 British.

Also pretty common to find these rechambered to such things a 308 Norma and 300 Win Mags. Unless you were left with something that tells you it really is a 30/06 you should probably do a chamber cast before you shoot it.

It's definitely chambered for 30-06. Maybe "kit" was the wrong word, more like buying off the a la carte menu. The scope and mounts are "no-name", and he had fitted it with an M1 style sling and rings, like most of the others in his collection.

[Ken in Iowa]

You are not the first to mislabel a US Model 1917 as an Enfield. They are completely different animals.

If it has the original 5 groove barrel, fatter bullets than the standard for 30/06 might be more accurate. This is due to the deeper grooves of the English pattern. For J words, I discovered that the Hornady 174 grain .3105" FMJ is ideal. .311" jacketed match or hunting bullets are also worth a try.

If you have a WWII replacement barrel, standard 30/06 ammunition is all that is required.

That baby looks quite attractive in my eyes. Perhaps dad didn't want it to get damaged...

[Ken in Iowa]

cheapshot,

You should carefully measure the bore, as any number of "American Enfields" were bored out by the British Home Guard during early WWII to accept .303 British bullets, with nothing else changed.

I have one of those "reamed out to .303 British" rifles that shoots better than I can hold it, once we figured out what it was.

yours, tex

I had not heard of reamed home guard rifles. Do you have any links about the modification?

[cheapshot]

Slugged the barrel and the slug was tight at about .3075, contacting the micrometer when rotated at .308. Barrel seems a bit fat in the middle though, lost some tension as I was driving the slug, but tightened a bit as I approached the chamber. Having never slugged a barrel, not sure how abnormal that is. I would imagine, once the rifling had indented the slug, the rest of the trip would be easier. Had to hammer it through, so it wasn't that loose.

So, it looks like a few shots are due this weekend to see how it shoots with .308 jacketed loads, then we move from there. If she will group, the game is afoot. If not, the search for a casting solution starts.

[guicksylver]

Slugged the barrel and the slug was tight at about .3075, contacting the micrometer when rotated at .308. Barrel seems a bit fat in the middle though, lost some tension as I was driving the slug, but tightened a bit as I approached the chamber. Having never slugged a barrel, not sure how abnormal that is. I would imagine, once the rifling had indented the slug, the rest of the trip would be easier. Had to hammer it through, so it wasn't that loose.

So, it looks like a few shots are due this weekend to see how it shoots with .308 jacketed loads, then we move from there. If she will group, the game is afoot. If not, the search for a casting solution starts.

Hi..you've got a real keeper there..
Dad my not have liked it for several reasons ..non of which make the gun less than what it is.

1. Long action..
2. As mentioned.... may still be cock on closing
3. Never got around to really getting the action to fit the stock properly, if he was doing the work
4. Won't shoot the "new " surplus military ammo available...
5. Recoiled more than the .243.

If it still has the original Remngton, Windhester or Eddystone barrel with a 1917 or 1918 barrel date it will be a five groove barrel and you can slug it all you want but unless you have a "V" block to measure it you will never get an accurate reading..if it has a replacement Johnson Semi auto two groove barrel you can..but why bother..what you need to know is the neck or leade dimension..look up "pound cast" on how to do that....

These were not "rebored as far as I know..they can with factory barrels bored differently than Springfields..the bores were the same .30 but the grooves were cut deeper.....look it up there are interesting articles out there explaining the differences...( make sure the are not just something someone threw on line)..

They will shoot with some hunting bullets that have flat bases but generally prefer wider (fatter bullets).. some of these will keyhole .308 boat tail bullets...

Now for the good news if you plan on shooting cast bullets out of this fine rifle you will learn what a fine and accurate gun it is for both target and hunting..

All of mine want at least a .312 cast bullet..generally speaking there is little if no leade..meaning you need a large base and small diameter nose ..ie Lyman 314299..

You may even find that you will have to go up to .313 on your base diameter...again this is with original barrels..

You've got a scope on yours, but here's what they can do with iron sights when you finally get a bullet that fits...
One of mine



Couple of groups ..got plenty more if you would like to see them..

[Ken in Iowa]

Excellent post by guicksylver.