Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Custom Rifles & Wildcats 1917 Enfield questions

there is a 1917 enfield in 30-06 at a local gun shop that has already been sporterized for a decent price. i was told that the ones made by Eddystone and Winchester are brittle. if it is one of these could i still make a 338-06 out of it or do i have to look for a Remington made one?

rattler

Rattler, Eddysone receivers are reputed to be brittle, but I've never heard that about Winchester. In fact, Winchester actions are usually considered more desireable than Remington. Rem and Win each made about 600,000 Enfields, while Eddystone made more than 1.3 million units. You can tell who made yours by looking under the bolt for E,W, or R. These rifles in good shape and unmodified are getting more and more scarce and valuable, so it would be a shame to cut on a good one, but if somebody has already done the deed that's not an issue. IMHO, Enfields make up into heavy, butt ugly sporters and aren't worth spending money on. I know some diagree, and in fact A-Square used to use the action to make big stopping rifles, but there are so many better choices around today, its hard to justify spending money on an Enfield. Its a grand old rifle, and the doughboys carried three times as many Enfields as Springfields to France, but to my mind not a good choice for a sporter. I wouldn't shoot, much less rebarrel, an Eddystone. But, as always, its your money and your opinion is the only one that matters. Steve

yes i realize alot of ppl dont like these rifles and i wouldnt dream of cutting up an original but i do like them and since this one is sporterized, drilled and tapped i think a rebarreling and new stock is worth the extra $. (grantted i also prefer the Savage 110 to most riffles, have fun blastin gophers with a 45/70, and am facinated by old military rifles..... im a strange duck aint i?) anyways ill go have another look at it in the morning.

rattler
from the "middle-of-nowhere" in NE Montana

Once there was a forum just for the P-14,M1917 and M-30.The best made of the bunch was made by Remington.Winchester made the fewest so was the most collectable.Both the Remington and Winchester reported few if any problems.The most common,Eddystone had problems with the barrels being screwed in super tight,when they were removed the recievers cracked.Heat treatment of the nickle steel,like pre-war M-70s,during wartime production could be off,that too is like pre-war M-70s.My Eddystone was soft!



The action doesn't handle gas as well as the mauser but is long enough for the H&H magnums when the rear of the mag box is turned around.They are heavy and that ugly dog's leg bolt handle can be straightened or thinned.If you are thinking about 338,a 340Wea.is almost as easy.Bill Leeper worked wonders on my P-17 when he rechambered to 308Norma.

downdwindtracker
I find it interesting that you also had a p-17 converted to 308norma I had one
done back in 1963 by Elwood Epps of Clinton ON, it has given good service over the years.
and yours ? do you still use it. NC

Elwood Epps is likely the most fanous Canadian gunsmith.You have a piece of history.

Mine has an interesting history too,a late build 9-18 Eddystone it was used during WWII by the Canadian Army,either to guard prisoners or Home Guard.The bottom plate had a SIN# of a B.C. resident in his eightys.It had been sporterized with a Bishop stock,trigger job,glass-bedded,and a Herter muzzle brake.It came with a K4 Weaver.I bought it at a gun show for $60CDN.

Bill Leeper when he rechambered and matte blued,recontoured the rear bridge to M-700 fixing the last gunsmiths mistakes.BTW, a 308Norma is a 1/8" shorter than the 300Win,and a much better fit in the standard 30.06 box.I thinned and shaped the dog leg bolt handle and installed a button release on the bottom plate.When Bill rechambered to solve that 11 thou of headspace,he made a chamber that is < 1/10 of a thou out of round,making a accurate rifle even better.Sierra 180 Prohunters at 3050f/s ,5-shot group,5/8" at 100 meters.I can't shoot better than that.

When whoever did the stock,all he did was sand it,it's too big.This winter I wil trim,shape and checker with a fleur-de-lis pattern.These rifles can take some styling that would be out of place on a mauser.

This is a lucky rifle,evertime I carried it I saw game,just not legal.Next fall I hope to take it up the Dease for Alaska moose,it's range and steady will come in handy.

Hello Rattler,
I have a customer that I have been building rifles for off the old enfields for about 20 years. he hunts every gunshow and gun auction for certain actions, he then brings them to me with his list of todo's. I tell him every time they are butt ugly and they are bad for my reputation when folks see them. the remaks are of course only in fun. but anyway he builds them in just about every caliber you can think of.Some of which are 300 win mag 338 win mag 340 weatherby 300 weatherby, 416 rigby (with considerable work). he has yet to have a pressure problem with any of them. I do check them for hardness and x-ray for cracks before starting the project. Anyway what I am saying in a long way around is, If you like the action and want to build off of it then go for it. with a little work, such as replacing the bolt handle with a straight one and spending time and milling the sight ears off correctly and filling that ugly hole with the proper metal so it will blue correctlly you can make a darn nice looking rifle(just dont get to close and take your glasses off. haha. good luck with your project any way you do it.

James Mills
the rifleman
JIMS CUSTOM GUNS
Lubbock, Tx.
jimscustomguns@aol.com

Opinions vary. From my nickname, you can guess where I stand on this issue.

I love my Remingon '17 in .300 Winchester Magnum. When I blew the factory barrel after putting several hundred full-power .300 Win. Mag. loads through it (a barrel, I might add, that was made at the time of the Russian Revolution), I replaced it with an E.R. Shaw "varmint" contour barrel that I had chambered in .300 Winchester. It still shoots 1/2 m.o.a. for me.

I've also played with numerous other rifles based on this action, a .308 target rifle, a 6.5x55 with a heavy stainless Gaillard barrel that is a one-hole rifle, a friend's .300 Winchester -- to name a few -- and they've all worked well.

People get bent out of shape about the difference between Remington, Winchester and Eddystone. Remingtons and Winchesters are simply excellent. I favour Remingtons, and they're not rare.

Eddystones are fine, too, as long as the gunsmith doing the work knows the trick . The trick (according to my gunsmith) is to spin the barrelled receiever in a lathe and make a tiny relief cut at the intersection of the barrel shoulder and the face of the receiver. Apparently in 1917 they tightened these barrels onto the receivers in a giant flywheel that applied such an insane amount of torque that the barrel was practically welded in there. It was so tight, in fact, that conventional methods of removing a barrel using a vise and brute strength would crack the receiver before letting the barrel go.

If you make the relief cut, however, you can apparently remove the barrel by unscrewing it with your hand.

The real downside of the Eddystone is that the receivers are so damned hard that you might break drill bits trying to drill and tap them for scopes. Plus, machining the ears can be a real chore with something so hard. Those receivers have been described as "hard as glass".

I'd say go for it if you feel so inclined. You only live once and you may have fun with this project.

hey P

I have a custom 1917 enfield winchester and it is a great , accurate and well ballanced. the first gun I customized was a p17 enfield and it was a big ich to remove the barrel you are right in your claims about the removal. When I did remove the barrel I put a douglas 06 back on, 26 inch long, [bleep] stock and a redfield scope and was shooting .5 moa"s. Remington made the model 20 up to I believe 1932 using the left over p17 action, great gun. you can do a rockwell hardness test on it if you are concern. I also have broken a bit drilling for a scope on that endever and was lucky. I paid 8 US dollars for the action only, and when finished had a tack driver.

bearbeater

Bearbaiter, I think you've got a typo there , podnah. Remington called it the model 30. Does anybody know why earlyModel 30's carry a 1906 date stamp--was that a patent date?

hey stieve

I cant spell or punctuate or remember but thanks for the kick in the head so I can remember and I believe you are right thanks again

bearbeater