P17 Eddystone sporter project

[Remiel]

Possible to bore it out to 35 Whelen?

That would be a neat idea, but I have no clue.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Remiel]

In fact ,the barrel is not nickle steel,only the reciever and bolt .......the late Eddystones are well documented for suspect production methods ,and often the metal is glass hard....After 11/11/1918 the Eddystone factory went into overdrive ,and there are many eyewitness accounts of the methods used to turn out as many as another million rifles before production stopped six months later.

According to a serial decoder receiver was made August 1918

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Gtek]

Just me but that looks like just a little expansion forward of web, mic that area compared to an unfired, might see .001"-.002". Anneal the necks and touch the lands with a good 180-200 Boolit, fire formed and it might just surprise you how well it shoots. A quick spin of #0000 wool or some fine to medium abrasive pad might make all bad look go away. That to me looks like a case expanding and grabbing a little rough chamber. Did it close on a Field gauge? If the bore is close to worthy, slugging you may find the need for the old 314299 or ball park.

[muskeg13]

I don't know what you paid for your M1917 "Sporter" but the Redfield Series 80 receiver sight is worth an easy $75-100 by itself.

Several commenters have suggested reboring and rechambering for 8mm-06, .338-06 or .35 Whelen. Since you have determined there is a headspace problem, sticking with the standard -06 (shoulder) version of any caliber probably won't fix excess headspace. You'll need to go with an Ackley Improved version with a sharper shoulder angle to reset headspace or go up to a larger and longer magnum case. The standard headspace fix of removing material from the rear of the barrel and rechambering to reset headspace is going to be complicated by having to line up the sights without any cant. It would be easier to rebarrel using a new Criterion or other barrel with a short chamber. Then just rechamber. I did this on my M1917, and it wasn't hard.

Finally, there were a few comments on barrel and receiver steels. Per Hatcher's Notebook, all M1917s were made with "Smokeless Barrel Steel" which is nearly identical to the WW2 War Department (WD) Steel 1350 used in high serial numbered M1903 Springfields. All M1917 bolts and receivers were nickel steel from the start, whereas Rock Island M1903 production converted to nickel steel bolts and receivers in 1918, and Springfield Armory didn't incorporate this improvement until 1927.

Hatcher also notes that M1917 barrels are slightly tighter than M1903s (an average of .305" versus .306") using Enfield rifling, because it gave the best results with that rifling form with the diameter .30-06 bullet then in use. He also states on p. 16, "It is interesting to note in this connection, that the 1917 barrels will always outwear the '03 Springfield barrels."

[john.k]

The Eddystone factory was actually built (super) by John .T.Thompson,who then became the general manager for the duration.

[405grain]

muskeg13: Wow, that's amazing! It seems that the P1914 that I worked on must have worn out it's original barrel, had a replacement barrel installed later by an English gunsmith, then wore out that barrel too. How often does an action survive long enough to have three barrels?! After seeing the cartridge photographs and giving it more thought, I agree with you that converting to a 30-06 based cartridge with a larger bullet diameter won't correct the headspace issue.

[missionary5155]

I would go to .375-06. It is a great cartridge. Pushes 270 grain cast easily to 2200 fps. Or a 345 grain to 1850 fps.. Hunt any critter with that.
But there is always the belted beasts We have an 03 in 30 AK that is 5% less than the 300 Mag. Fun caliber.

[muskeg13]

muskeg13: Wow, that's amazing! It seems that the P1914 that I worked on must have worn out it's original barrel, had a replacement barrel installed later by an English gunsmith, then wore out that barrel too. How often does an action survive long enough to have three barrels?! After seeing the cartridge photographs and giving it more thought, I agree with you that converting to a 30-06 based cartridge with a larger bullet diameter won't correct the headspace issue.

Hatcher's detailed metallurgy only references U.S. Model of 1917 steels, but I suspect they were the same used in P14 manufacture or he probably would have noted the difference in his comments about converting from P14 to M1917. He does state on p. 14, "The rifle that was being produced for the British was of highly advanced design, making it the best rifle used in World War 1. Though it was basically a typical Mauser, it was improved in several respects, and had a bolt and receiver of high grade nickel steel that gave it a superbly strong action."

Also, the P14 was derived from the P13 in .276 Enfield so it was designed to accommodate a much higher pressure cartridge than the .303. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.276_Enfield

Did your P14 have an original P14 military barrel? Maybe the British proof mark is incorrect or like you suspect, it was rebarreled at least once. How often does an action survive to have 3 barrels? Apparently forever if it's made of highest quality materials and isn't abused.

On Remiel's headspace issue: Were Go-No Go gauges used to check headspace? Just looking at the burnished marks on the cases in the photos, I'm not sure they indicate stretching. Maybe it's just normal case expansion and friction against the chamber walls? I've seen similar marks on some of my military cases fired in M98 Mausers without excessive headspace. Remiel's marks do not appear to be incipient head separations I've seen that had very distinct shiny bright rings around the circumference of the case.

[2152hq]

The case doesn't look like a headspace issue right off, just a slightly rough chamber and perhaps a bit oversize? as mentioned.
We are talking about a War time production rifle.

If you have or have access to HS gauges, give it a real test.
If it is out of spec, do the simple neck up/then neck back down to 30cal leaving a new shoulder to HS on and fireform the brass to the chamber...HS issue all gone.
Cheap to do,,costs exactly nothing.
The result is a good to go 30-06 Milsurp Sporter.

Reboring will cost around $300 when shipping is considered.
Rebbl'g,,,$300 will cover the cost of the bbl blank contoured for 1917 in most instances. They are not 98Mauser pre-fit bbl's. Add for the Gunsmith charges to thread, put it together, chamber and HS.

Criterion bbl would be the least expensive if still available but you still have to either do the work yourself or pay someone.
When done you have a 1917 Milsurp Sporter with a new bore that costs more.

An Eddystone is an Eddystone. They always will.
Built in an old Locomotive plant in Pa. Machinery from Remington. Doesn't matter if Patton himself was the Over=Lord of the place.

Don't put a lot of $$ into one unless you are forever in love with it.

No matter what you make of it no one will
ever give you back for it even 1/2 what you spend to make it something special.
It's the Sears&Revelation brand of the 1917's
Just the way it is. Shouldn't be..but it is.

[john.k]

Actually ,the Eddystone factory was built new from the ground up ,took a year ,and even the Baldwin factory wasnt old ,being built in the previous five years .......The Eddystone P14s were subject to rigourous British War Office inspection standards ,and to begin with production was at a standstill when the three makers couldnt get rifles accepted .....so an officer was sent out from England to get things moving .....first deliveries were in July 1916 ,by which time oddball rifles were no longer needed,however the P14s had much better accuracy than the Lee Enfields ,and were used as sniper rifles ...first with better sights ,and later with telescopic sights.

[muskeg13]

There's a lot of unsubstantiated blather, perpetuated by the ignorant internet, regarding P14s and U.S. Model 1917s.
- Eddystones are crap, Winchester and "real" Remingtons are better. Truth: They are all extremely well made to exacting tolerances with completely interchangeable parts for each country's version (that were made by the millions in three factories in record time). Amazing!
- They have "tight" barrels caused by wartime over-tightening, laxness, and hydraulic equipment. Truth: In P14s and M1917s, barrels are no harder to remove barrels in the average M98 Mauser, if you know what you're doing and have the right tools. There are internet videos of hand tightening of M1917 barrels during WW1.
- They may be inaccurate due to the wartime expedient of using British .303 bore dimensions "for a while" until we tightened the bore specifications for the US .30-06. Truth: Complete BS! US bore specs for the M1917 were actually .001" TIGHTER than the M1903 from the very start.

M1917s and P14s were not perfect. Their weak ejection springs were a constant problem that is easily, and permanently, fixed with a simple modification. They cock on close, but this can be reversed if you want. And... they are about a pound heavier than the M1903 with a 2" longer barrel, but they were made with better materials and techniques than WW1 wartime M1903s.

[Shawlerbrook]

Send it to JES and get a 35 Whelen back for less than $300.

[racepres]

I guess I am still in the "FireForm and Shoot for Accuracy" camp..
Once Fireformed...headspace is a Non-Issue.. for that chamber Only..

[Ajohns]

Turn the barrel in one turn, with a shoulder job and reface the breech. Run the reamer. If the bore is good, and it "could" shoot well, you have the same rifle.

[2152hq]

You can say all you want about the Eddystone, Remington and Winchester 1917's being all the same,,made the same, inspected the same,,Brit quality start-up, on and on. Maybe all true, likely just about all true.

Take an Eddystone and dump some money into it, Sporterize it, restock it, rebbl it, checkering, sights, reprofile the recv'r,,,do it all. You can have a lovely rifle and a perfectly good, strong, safe rifle at that. Just as good as a Remington or Winchester.

But IF you ever try and sell it the very first question asked or the very first glance the prospective buyer will take is 'Who mfg'd it?'
It's an Eddystone...
You know it as well as any of us and if it's an Eddystone,, the headshaking will start and tirekicking commence.
If any offer is thrown out there it will be extreme low-ball..all because of the Eddystone mfgr name.

Not fair to the rifle,,I admit that,,but that's where we are.

Use the rifle for what it is,,don't make a money pit out of it is all I'm saying.
Gunsmithing costs are very high. It's not 'the old days' when working on this stuff was inexpensive.
Bbls, chambering reamers, HS gauges, shipping, a gunsmith that knows what they are doing,,,
I and a few others have offered a Zero money way to shoot it safely if you hand load even with a HS issue.
What's there to lose?

It's easy to tell someone else to spend their money on rebbling, rechambering, magnum conversions, ect.
Any actual prices from a shop or 'smith been quoted? Might surprise you.

The Eddystone has gotten the short end of the 17 Enfield stick through no fault of it's own.
But to make believe that it's not true is to deny what the market has said for decades.
They have a market value less than the other 2 . Plus as an action/bbld action to build a rifle on, they are much less desirable than the other 2. Remington being #1.

The OP owns the gun, he does what he wants to of course.
But don't try and convince me that pouring money into what would be a custom build on an Eddystone 1917 is a wise choice.
It's not.
..and that is the ONLY point about the Eddystone 1917 I am making.
Only that & Nothing else about the rifle, it's strength, what kind of steel, who made it, where, how tight the bbls are installed,,,or anything about it.

I'm done...have fun with your project

[john.k]

Another interesting fact is that due to a squabble between Springfield ,the Army ,and WRA Co,Winchester rifles wernt allowed to be used in France.....this condition was imposed by New York Democrats to prevent Winchester from 'jumping the gun" and getting a PR advantage over Remington .Winchester had gone ahead with production of their own design of M17 ,while Remington/ERA was waiting for the Army to produce their own design for a rifle.

[Shawlerbrook]

Sporterizing just about any milsurp will not be a financial positive but most of us are not doing this to make $$$. And yes, the price to rebore to 35 Whelen will be $300 including return postage from JES and has been quoted.

[Remiel]

I traded a savage youth 22 I won and 100 bucks, went through all 3 gauges and it failed all of them, it closed on the field gauge like it wasn't there, haven't had time to get pictures of the bore, just had a memorial for a very close family friend and just haven't been in the mood, numerich has a CM short chambered barrel, worst case I'll part it out including the spare NOS bolt.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[RustyReel]

Stupid question, but have you checked the headspace using your NOS bolt???

As noted somewhere above, as a handloader you can solve the headspace problem with your reloading procedures, just need to keep track of your brass.

Don't worry about it being an Eddystone, Haters gonna Hate and usually they are people who have never owned any version of the rifle.

[muskeg13]

I apologize for contributing to morphing this thread away from gunsmithing to include more general P14/M1917 manufacturing discussion, but I ran across this very interesting article focusing on Eddystone and the Remington connection. It seems that Eddystone rifles really are just Remingtons not made at the Ilion, NY plant. The Eddystone Rifle Works, formerly the home of the Baldwin Locomotive Works in Eddystone, PA was outfitted and operated by the Remington Arms Company of Delaware, beginning in 1915.

https://www.remingtonsociety.org/the...-of-eddystone/