Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Custom Rifles & Wildcats Advice on Model of 1917 Action Build

Hillbillybear, Thank you for the compliment, that Hurt and Hurt is pretty awsome, as well. Lots of similarities between your gun and mine with all of the D-T stuff.

BSA and Oregon45, nice hunting rigs there, too! If that model 30 was not collector pristine, I would have a chambering reamer at the ready! Cool gun anyway.

When mine was a 'mere' 30/06 (original barrel, til I wore it out) and later a 300 WBY it and I took game from all over in factory ammo capable guise as well. Bull ELk, Black Bear, a truckload of deer, even a few varmints along the way.

Great custom rifle basis, in my view.

WOW! That one begs the question, WHY?

I have seriously considered leaving mine .30-06, but never thought of rebarreling it to a short action cartridge, much less a true small bore.

Given that, I bet you could watch your hits 'cause the thing wouldn't move in recoil!

Ed

It was a heavy barrel with the original stock, and had a block
in the magazine to make it a single shot. Have also encountered
a couple in 22-250.

A 1917 in 223.... Wrong at SO many levels. Sigh.

It had to be a labor of love. Slightly off topic, but I once
saw an Arisaka that had been rebarreled to 257WBY.

Well, that woud be an UGLY 257WBY, but it makes sense from a purely utilitarian POV. Those Jap actions are certainly strong enough.

Back on topic, There are lots of nice big bores out there on 1917's. I hope the OP goes to at least a 300 H&H with his. To go less would be a cryin shame and waste of action length capabilities. Just a down right shame.

404 Jeffery would be my choice if converting to a magnum bolt face.

A Great old cartridge, but kinda short for that action, though. It would work, just like a 35 Whelen or other medium length round would work. I still vote 416 Rigby if going Ele class. If not going really big, then 375 H&H, 375WBY, or one of the STW or RUM rounds. If using the stock that is with it,set up for irons, then 375 and up makes the most sense from here.

The 416 Rigby on a 1917 has the O'Connor connection, which is not to be underestimated. In fact, that might sway me to the 416 entirely. I can always have a 404 on a Mauser, as the rifle-gods intended

NOW youre a-talkin!

IMO the best use for a Enfield is to do a 416 Rigby ala Tom Burgess style...

Dober

I have two, a 300 WBY and 30-06. I had to modify the feed rails with a ball mill to get it to feed 300 WBY cases to my satisfaction. It was utterly reliable until I broke the stock! I have a new stock that Mel Smart glued up for me that I need to finish and drop it in. I am thinking about a new barrel in 375 H&H or 375 WBY at the same time though!

375 would be ok, I'd not go smaller on this action though, but that's just me and my ways.

A friend here inherited one, and he's thinking about 375 as he's not overly crazy about the 416 Rigby.

Guess B&C makes a handle for the Enfield, might turn it into a yote rifle yet...grin

Dober

Steelhead, I luv you man. I enjoy sticking a burr up your azz occasionally. Wakes you up from your dreamland.
I do agree that a CZ550 may be cheaper and I do have one in 458 Lott. But after buying good bottom metal, 3 pos safety, trigger, and straightening the threads you will have a sum of money in the 550.
Butch

Sorry for digging up an old thread. Ed too many letters, what became of your model 1917 ?

Always liked the old Enfield 17!

Hang a pic if it ever got finished!

I have 1917s in 25-06, 30-06, and a single shot .220 Swift. My question is "What publication and date had the article about O'Connor's .416 build by Al Biesen with a low power Weaver on the 1917?" This gun is not pictured or mentioned in the Jack O'Connor book for some reason.

This is the one steelhead doesn't like. A 416 Rigby

I have had a couple, one was a .333 OKH Belted built by Charlie O’Neil. I had another with a Buhmiller Barrel, it was a 22-250. I gave it to DesertMuleDeer. He is turning it into a 416 Rigby.

Who made the most desirable 1917, Winchester, Remington or Eddystone?

Most that I know said that the Rem. was. The eddystone as I recall had a cutout in the rear bridge that was unsightly.

I have had some of all of them and find no difference in function. All worked well and shot well.

The only one I still have is a Rem. and has always been a .75 inch rifle with 180 grain loads.