M1917 Enfield question

[geoffg]

I picked up a gun collection some years back and just got around to researching some of the older guns. One has me stumped. Its a U.S. M1917 Enfield production date of April 1918 - based on the serial# range, 50300. It has a Lyman rear sight and all the usual markings line up on the barrel and receiver. The stock is what I can't identify. Its smooth with a forearm cap (like a Rem 700 BDL) and no upper wood cover (upper barrel is exposed). Is this someones idea of an "enhancement" or an official version of this riffle?

[Gunfixer]

Picture please....? Sounds like a Bishop replacement but.....

[geoffg]

Will do. I'll follow up tonight.

Thanks,
Geoff

[atr]

Remington made a sporter version of the 1917 Enfield 30-06....so Im wondering maybe it could be?
but without a picture its hard to say

[geoffg]

Here is a left side pic of the 1917. Ask if other angles are needed.

- The stock appears to be old.... same age as the gun.
- The butt plate is smooth metal with two screws and comes to a sharp point over the top of the stock.
- The grip plate is also metal with a single screw.
- Sight is a Lyman Model 57SME, if that helps any.

Thanks for the help on this.
Geoff

[MtGun44]

No rear sight ears, either a major milling job which was a std
sporterizing mod in the old days or this is not a 1917 US Enfield.

If the receiver says that is a US M1917, then it is a fully sporterized one,
like many tens of thousands that were done in the days when
they were far cheaper than a new hunting rifle. Nice looking rifle,
sadly these are worth about 1/4th of what the stock rifle would be
today.

Bill

[Frank46]

Remington made a commercial model 30 both in carbine and rifle sizes. In all my years of gun shows have seen exactly two. One in 25 rem and the other in 30-06. Frank

[JW6108]

That is at least an Enfield action. The clue from the pic is the round section at the rear of the bolt release. I'm looking at mine now and it is identical to yours.

The one I have (Winchester) has had the sight ears milled off, so is a good shooter but not worth near what it would be if it was in original trim. As Bill says, they were a bargain to acquire and convert to good hunting rifles back in the day; I don't suppose anyone thought they would ever be worth much in their original condition.

[geoffg]

I took a close look where the rear sight ears should have been. Sure enough it looks like it's been milled. Missed it because the Lyman is mounted over most of it. So I guess I have a devalued 1917. For me it's still a keeper. Not sure about the origins of the stock but I guess it really doesn't matter.

Thanks for the help on this!
Geoff

[TNsailorman]

One thing for sure, it is not a Model 30. I have owned a Model 30 and it was made in 1930 and Remington made a version of it until WWII started. None had a black forend cap. What you have is a sportized 1917 with I am fairly sure is a Bishop stock. I have seen some sportized 1917's that I would rather have than about any rifle being made today. The old Parker Hale and BSA firms made up cutom rifles using 1917 and 1914 actions and they were beautiful. I have owned/reworked several 1917's over the years and they were all accurate--more accurate than I was capable of holding. Klein's out of Chicago use to sell these rifle for somewhere between 8 and 12 dollars and about .75 cents shipping--right to your door. No laws then about registration or shipping. I had one back in the 90's that would go 1/2" to 3/4" groups with several brand 150 grain bullets and IMR 4350 powder. Like a dummy, I played with it and then sold it for filthy money to a local lady who wanted it for a Christmas present for her husband. With that Lyman sight you should be able to dial your rifle in and give a scope sighted one a run for its money out to 200 or more yards. At long range though, scopes seem to rule--especially for old men like me. That is a fine looking rifle and if I were in your shoes, I would shoot it and enjoy it. If you sell it you will live to regret it. My experience anyway.

[Gunfixer]

Well at least you got a good shooter. I am currently building one up in 8mm rem mag for my brother. I have had them in the shop in 30-06, 25-06 308 norma mag, 300 win mag, 270 and 30 gibbs. All milled (not by me) and all ended up shooting real good.

[Bob S]

The M1917 action was very popular up through the 1950's for conversions to .30 cal magnums for 1000 yard shooting. The cartridge that the action was originally designed for (as the Pattern 1913) was virtually a 7mm magnum. (with the start of WW I, the Brits produced it in .303 as the Pattern 1914, and the 7mm Enfield cartridge was all but forgotten).

Resp'y,
Bob S.

[TNsailorman]

Both the U.S. and the Brits were on their way to a 7mm cartidge when wars interferred with planning. The British were on the verge of replacing the .303 enfield with a 7mm cartridge and WWI interferred. The U.S. had started the Garand experiments between WWI and WWII with a .276 pedersen design cartidge but at the insistance of MacArthur(the head of the procurement dept.) Mr. Garand had to switch to the 30/06 and redevelope. That was one of the main reasons we didn't get the Garand until 1937 instead of 1931 or 32. I forgot the source but I read about this while studying the history of the Garand several years ago. There has been a lot of politics and personal egos involved in U.S. weapons procurement and the Garand story is just one of many in our history. The U.S. starting WWII without a decent tank is another.

[4570guy]

Enjoy your sporterized '17. I have one as well and it is a tack driver. I like it so much I had to go out and purchase an unmodified 1917

[Four Fingers of Death]

I have a few sporterised M17s, they are nice and a part of our firearms history as well.