enfield 1917 reblued???

[BT Sniper]

I'm looking at a 1917 enfield that has obviously been reblued and stock worked over. Very good job as it looks like it is fresh from factory or better. Only issue I have is the "U.S. model of 1917" has been removed from top of receiver. The rest is all there from my novice point of view. Still has the dog ears on the back sight and what not. So why would anyone grind of the orginal markings??? This can't be from teh factory like this can it? Does the W in teh serial # mean it is a Winchester? The serial numbers are nice why wouldn't the orginal enfield 1917 markings look as good. If the GS redid the serial numbers why not teh original enfield markings? and last question should I buy this rifle?

Check it out! She looks beautiful! Think it would make a good high power compition gun and I love the 1917 enfields, so what do you guys think???? I don't care much about collectors value just want a gun that looks this good and shoots good. Any thoughts???

http://i636.photobucket.com/albums/uu87/BTSniper/1917enfield.jpg

http://i636.photobucket.com/albums/uu87/BTSniper/enfield2.jpg

http://i636.photobucket.com/albums/uu87/BTSniper/enfield3.jpg

http://i636.photobucket.com/albums/uu87/BTSniper/enfield4.jpg

Thanks

BT

[stubshaft]

The serial number W26614 should have been produced by Winchester in October of 1917. The lens you used to take the full photo makes it look shorter than a regular 1917. I can't imagine why someone would grind off the top of the receiver, unless they were planning to D&T for a scope mount and gave up on the project.

As far as whether or not you should buy it? It is obviously your call. Is the bore good? Does the barrel stamp match the date of the receiver (10/17)? Is it still cock on closing or has someone modified it? Does it have the original trigger?

They were decently made rifles, but heavy (to me). I personally prefer a 1903 but if it is priced right it would possibly be a good buy.

[Brithunter]

Thousands of these were overhauled at the Weedon Depot in the UK and during the overhaul the volley sights were removed. Some even had ne stocks fitted that have no cut out for the volley sights. You might have oe of those that were never reissued and eventually surpluseed out. The British Government sold them abroad as they didn't want us the natives of these islands to have them :evil:

[Longone]

Also if you can check the headspace, parts swap were pretty common and you don't want to shoot something that's not safe. Check for a "W" on another parts to see just what may have been replaced.

Can you take another pic with an "06" cartridge laying on the follower" ?

Longone

[NuJudge]

My recollection is that very early US Model of 1917 rifles had markings very similar to the British Pattern 14 rifles. I don't have my reference books close at hand. As some have said above, I believe it is a British Pattern 14. check whether .303 or .30-'06 fits under the extractor.

Many of the British Pattern 14 rifles were converted to Drill Purpose by drilling a hole in the barrel ahead of the receiver. Look carefully for that.

Many P14 rifles are pristine on the outside, but had rather neglected bores. If it has not been drilled and has a good bore, that would be worth having.

[Gtek]

Headspace, bore condition? If top of bridge has been ground to point of weak. It very well might have not been stamped. They were blued when first produced, parked at overhaul. It may be a couple hundred dollar gun, it may be worth a whole lot more if untouched. Heavy-yes, super strong-yes, usually shoot better than me-yes. Gtek

[MtGun44]

I was wondering the same thing. Is this a P-14 and not a US 1917?

Bill

[BT Sniper]

Can't examin the gun as it is not a local sale for me. Gun is advertised as a "US 1917 Enfield" in 30-06 caliber in "great" condition with "good" bore. Offered price is $400 ??? The pic does make the barrel length look short, hopefully it is just that the pic.

So guns came from factory without model stamped? This surely can't be "original" condition. I'm fimilar with the 1917s and love everything about them including weight and dog leg bolt. Learned to shoot with a sporterized 1917 rem in 300 WM. The combination of the weight and the sporterized stock comes to the shoulder perfect and "feels" wonderfuly ballenced to me.

BT

[Dutchman]

I was wondering the same thing. Is this a P-14 and not a US 1917?

Bill

+1

Show us a photo of the bolt face and any other markings, little stamps and such anywhere on the metal or wood. Show both sides of the receiver ring, too.

Dutch

[flounderman]

gun could be a pattern 14. I have a pattern 14 with ERA stamped on the receiver ring. the bolt face should tell you if it is a pattern 14, or 1917. pattern 14 is big enough for a magnum case head. 06, is just 06 size. magazine box is different and the extractor for the pattern 14 is the same as the 1917 except the hook has about 1/4 of the width ground off on both sides. the 1917 has a hook that is the same size as the rest of the extractor. if you can see the bolt face, you can tell if it is a pattern 14 bolt or a 1917.

[WineMan]

My M1917 is very accurate. My feeling is that for long range, the large aperture on the ladder sight, lack of click adjustment and windage adjustment (drift front sight) can be a problem. There are P14 ladders out there with a 1 MOA dial adjustment that worked well in WWI sniper rifles. You can put a disk of metal with a smaller hole over the the aperture. Hold off will be the only adjustment for wind. I use mine as issued at silhouette matches and for some reason it (I) do best with it at the Turkey targets (385 meters). Go figure?

Wineman

[Multigunner]

Years ago actions of M1917 and P-14 rifles that had been converted to 8mm were imported, most with a shot out corroded 8mm Mauser barrel still mounted.

You could order these actions with your choice of M1917 or P-14 bolts.
The converted P-14 used a M1917 bolt when rebarreled to 8mm.

Not sure where the conversions were done. Lituania and the Chinese both used converted rifles of this type. I think the Lituanian conversions may have been done in Belgium, while the Chinese conversions were done in China after the U S blocked supplies of .30-06 ammunition.

The actions with choice of bolt were sold to those who wanted to build their own rifle from scatch, using still available surplus stocks and parts, or to create a sporter without butchering a complete rifle.

Theres no way of knowing without close examination, but this could be a rifle built up from combined M1917 and P-14 parts.
It might also be a restored rifle built using a receiver that had once been DT'ed and the holes filled in then the surface ground flush removing remnants of markings.

A reactivated DP rifle with welded up receiver ring is another possibility. Though the only DP rifles of this sort that I've seen had the hole drilled horizontally. Some deactivated No.4 rifles had the hole drilled in from the top, with hardened steel rodd driven in to block the chamber.

I would not consider buying that rifle till I knew a lot more about it.

PS
It does look nice in the photos.

A shortened M1917 was in limited use by Chinese recruits in India/Burma , but these were more obviously shortened. I would say the shortened appearance is an illusion.

[Dutchman]

I was pretty sure before but am totally sure now....

This rifle is a British P14.

The W prefix of the s/n is exclusive to P14. United States M1917 rifles do not have a letter prefix.

I have J.C.Harrison's book, "The American Enfield".

There are anomalies as to markings. I recently sold a Remington P14 with a very low 02974 serial number mfg in 1914. The maker mark should have been RE in an oval, according to Harrison, but with an early rifle it was RE without the oval. Minor thing but still a variation from the larger part of production.

This P14 was FTR in 1962. You can see the '62 on the side of the buttstock and one of the acceptance stamps on the left side of the receiver ring is 61. The sisal rope on the lower sling swivel was for the hang-tag. The receiver had the wonderful British black paint. The barrel was unfired 5 groove.

Because of the long service history, widely distributed issuance and many varied FTR protocols these rifles can be difficult to pin down with a definite opinion. Some of the Brit P14 never left the U.S. after manufacture. Many went to British colonies were the FTR programs weren't as stringent as in the UK. So it usually takes a detailed examination of a sample before you can have an educated opinion. Pretty much same goes for U.S. M1917 rifles. It's very difficult to make a blanket statement about them.

http://images12.fotki.com/v20/photos/4/28344/9895637/DSCF3897cb-vi.jpg
http://images60.fotki.com/v662/photos/4/28344/9895637/DSCF3899cb-vi.jpg
http://images56.fotki.com/v362/photos/4/28344/9895637/DSCF3903cb-vi.jpg
http://images54.fotki.com/v77/photos/4/28344/9895637/DSCF3904cb-vi.jpg

[RustyMusket]

I think it is clear that this is a P-14. However, to follow up on the P-17 comments...I have a 4 digit sr. # P-17 where the name has been very carefully ground off and no other modifications. I was told by the old timer who gave me the rifle that as part of their contract with the US Gov't, Winchester demanded that no "W" rifle ever be reimported after the war...they did not want to compete with their own domestic hunting rifle sales. I have heard this from several persons over the years but have no hard evidence.

[Dutchman]

I think it is clear that this is a P-14. However, to follow up on the P-17 comments...I have a 4 digit sr. # P-17 where the name has been very carefully ground off and no other modifications. I was told by the old timer who gave me the rifle that as part of their contract with the US Gov't, Winchester demanded that no "W" rifle ever be reimported after the war...they did not want to compete with their own domestic hunting rifle sales. I have heard this from several persons over the years but have no hard evidence.


Your story just doesn't hold water for a couple reasons.

I have a big fat book called "Winchester" by Harold Williamson published in 1952 that I bought in Old Mystic, Connecticut in 1969. It's a history of the Winchester company from before the beginning. It covers military contracts. It covers the Russian, British and American contracts of the WW1 period.

If your ~old timers~ story was credible there would be no Winchester built M1917 in the U.S., or the supply would be unreasonably reduced AND those M1917 made by Winchester would also have been seen with a ground receiver ring. Rifles that were issued to soldiers and went overseas also came back with soldiers when the war was over. Those rifles belonged to the Gov't. They stayed Gov't Property well into the 1940s.

Guns that go to war are not "reimported" when they come back to the U.S. They were never exported in the first place.. at least with the M1917 rifles that belonged to the Gov't.

Your old timers story forced me to read the 2 chapters on the foreign and American war contracts. Very detailed on the business aspect of war material manufacture. Not one word to support what you said. No hard evidence, no soft evidence. No evidence whatsoever.

By the way, welcome to the forum.

Dutch

[RustyMusket]

Dutch....you are most likely correct. However, why would someone very carefully grind off the recever and barrel marking? As for the ''reimportation" I agree with you....I had assumed these were rifles used by some foreign country and not returned with US servicemen.

My P-17 has no foreign proof marks nor any other non-USA markings. Sr # is 5xxx if that assists in any way. My old friend is long gone too.......

[Dutchman]

why would someone very carefully grind off the recever and barrel marking?

Many people thought the U.S. markings indicated U.S. ownership so they felt if they possessed such a weapon with those markings they would be seen as possessing a stolen Gov't firearm. You can't imagine how many times I've heard this one.



As for the ''reimportation" I agree with you....I had assumed these were rifles used by some foreign country and not returned with US servicemen.

The M1917 rifle was a primary issue rifle for troops going to France during WW1. In WW2 the M1917 was a ready-reserve secondary rifle. After WW2 many M1917 were sent out of the U.S. as Lend-Lease. My Remington M1917 went to Denmark.



My P-17 has no foreign proof marks nor any other non-USA markings.

My M1917 that went to Denmark has only some numbers on the bolt handle. That's generally a good indication of foreign issue. Some M1917 that went to England had a red band of paint around the fore arm to indicate non-.303 cartridge. The M1903 rifles got the same treatment and also Smith & Wesson MP revolvers chambered in .38 Special instead of .38 S&W. England generally did proofmark firearms held in the country so you'll see Brit markings on U.S. military guns for one reason or another. This does not apply to firearms held by U.S. forces stationed in UK. Only UK Lend-Lease or civilian loaned firearms (post-Dunkirk).

Dutch

[BT Sniper]

Well it seems someone is interested in the above riffle as a bid was placed. I still think it is a good looking riffle. I insted am picking up a couple 1917 sporter riffles.

Last couple questions.

1. wouldn't a p-14 in the above condition be worth more then a 1917 in the same condition.

2. is it possible somone went threw all the trouble to convert the above rifle from 303 to 30-06? or more likely is it just identified incorectly in the sales add since it is still labeled 1917 30-06?

[Multigunner]

I've heard of some British outfits filing off the U.S. Property mark on a Savage made No.4 rifle. Could the same have been done to some M1917 rifles issued to home guard or Irish defence force?

Its possible some third world user country might want to remove traces of the origin for political reasons, especially if the government was very anti-American.

Some countries only allowed civilian ownership of former military rifles if the rifle were modified so it could not accomodate a bayonet. Some may have had removal of military markings as a requirement.

Years ago a gunsmith wrote in an article that he had bid on a crate at a unclaimed freight auction and found dozens of unfinished 1903 Springfield receivers in the crate. He intended to use these to build a limited edition line of sporting rifles.

Its possible some unfinished receivers or blems could have been sold off as surplus. Several gunmakers built up sporters or drill rifles on unfinished 1901 Springfield receivers bought as scrap.
From what I've read the Drill rifle with 1901 receiver should never be fired with live ammo, the receiver having never been heat treated.

[Dutchman]

1. wouldn't a p-14 in the above condition be worth more then a 1917 in the same condition.

Can't answer such a speculative question.




2. is it possible somone went threw all the trouble to convert the above rifle from 303 to 30-06?

No.



or more likely is it just identified incorectly in the sales add since it is still labeled 1917 30-06?

Most likely this is the correct direction.

Dutch

[MtGun44]

Depends a lot on the knowledge and esp effort spent by the seller. Many "experts"
have zero idea of the history behind the 1917 US rifle and assume that one that has
that cranked back bolt handle and big sight ears is a US 1917, "couldn't be anything
else". And the US 1917s were in .30-06, "so what else could it be".

I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that this is what is going on.

Bill