Advantages and Disadvantages of P14 and P17 actions

I had a real soft spot for my Remington made M-17 rifle. Some years ago I inadvertently double charged a load of SR-4759 under a cast 210 gr Lyman # 311284. I'm not going to say that a modern sporter would not handle this just as well, but I won't put it to the test. On a warm summer's evening a few days later, I was shooting over a chronograph - each shot making a pleasing little bang, light recoil, and the velocity measured around 1800 fps. I believe it was the last round in the magazine that felt a little different. It boomed and recoiled like a .300 magnum, and the velocity read 2856 fps! Notice how well I remember the event more than 10 years later. No gas came back through the action, and aside from ringing ears I was fine. The bolt wouldn't open by hand, but I was able to tap it open with a short piece of 2X4. The primer was in the bottom of the magazine, the case head and primer pocket were enlarged. The case head lettering was permanently stamped into the bolt face. I felt very lucky - lucky that if it was going to happen that it happened with this rifle rather than my 1903 Springfield, and that the piece of brass in question was not at the end of it's life.

This rifle was pretty rough when I got it - one of clubs Century Arms passed off as sporters with a thick heavy B&C stock. I almost traded it off before I fired it - but then the first group I shot with it measured .75". The screw holes which were drilled in the receiver did not line up, so rather than drilling more holes in the receiver, I drilled a slot in the aluminum Weaver base, and brought it onto center with a bore sighter then epoxied it into place. The scope never moved, and that rifle must of rode thousands miles on my back. I became very fond of the ugly '06.

One of the things I liked about that rifle was the #### on closing feature. In rapid fire drills this proved superior to rifles which #### on the bolt lift, so I was never tempted to change it. Another trick I learned was to modify the Butler Creek scope cap. The plastic lever would get me now and then when the rifle was in recoil. I cut off the lever and it's plastic housing leaving just the tab on the cover. The cover was then rotated so the tab was at the bottom. I would carry the rifle with the magazine full, and chamber empty. When I needed to shoot, the bolt handle would hit the tab and open the cover. It proved very fast, but the disadvantage was your left eye was blocked by the cover.
 
Well made rifle, I own an Eddystone (the plant was run by Remington by the way) and it comfortably handles 308 220 grain pills loaded to stay supersonic at 1000 yards. best of all is the pin point accuracy with tarhet sights at that distance.
 
TimC said:
Well made rifle, I own an Eddystone (the plant was run by Remington by the way) and it comfortably handles 308 220 grain pills loaded to stay supersonic at 1000 yards. best of all is the pin point accuracy with tarhet sights at that distance.

The rifle I referred to above is also the rifle I learned to shoot long range with. I was somewhat disadvantaged with the 3X-9X scope, and with the adjustments maxed out, I still needed an aiming target on top of the berm, and a impact tagert at it's base. Still - I did some reasonable shooting in this fashion, and learned alot about wind and mirage.
 
I have a 17 chambered in 300 wm . A local gunsmith made it years ago .
More than acurate enough for hunting but a bit heavy ( although recoil is very light ) .
My biggest fear besides cracking the stock is loosing the detachable magazine . You could probably buy a new rifle for the cost of either .
 
RUPZUK said:
My biggest fear besides cracking the stock is loosing the detachable magazine . You could probably buy a new rifle for the cost of either .

A detachable magazine is quite rare in this model rifle, I have never seen one, who did the conversion? If you could post a few pics it would be great!
bigbull
 
Advantages: Strong action that will handle the full length magnums
Fairly reasonable purchase price. (2yrs. ago $80)
US Rifle of 1917 already has 30-06 barrel

Disadvantages: #### on closing (can purchase #### on opening kit)
Long firing pin distance
Original firing is a weak point
The safety is not stock friendly
They are a clunky gun so require extra work
 
Some pics from past and present projects:

First rifle project in 300Wby.


Prototype 6.5 Mystic rifle


6.5-06 P17 in a Boyds stock


308 Cast BR rifle in a P17 and Boyds stock.


300RUM with a 36" Bevan King barrel on a P14 action. Feathery 35lbs.
 
Casull said:
Bigbull,
It's very interesting to hear you talking on this subject, you obviously know your stuff and it's great that you are sharing that knowledge, many of us are very interested.
What case is a .500 Jeffries based on? There was a P14 in this caliber for sale not long ago for $1800 with brass and dies, ammo. That seems like a very good price. I know all too well what it costs to build and gear up to shoot these big ones.
Thanks,
Rob
Nice rifles there mysticplayer.

Casull, the 500 jeffery is it's own case, not based on anything previous. It was brought out by the British gunmaker W.J. Jerrery in about 1910, but I am not sure off the exact date. It had a 535 grn .510 bullet at about 2400 fps!:eek: The case is a rebated rim which brough some undersvered bad vibes with it.
Recoil is stout!
 
Gibbs505 said:
Nice rifles there mysticplayer.

Casull, the 500 jeffery is it's own case, not based on anything previous. It was brought out by the British gunmaker W.J. Jerrery in about 1910, but I am not sure off the exact date. It had a 535 grn .510 bullet at about 2400 fps!:eek: The case is a rebated rim which brough some undersvered bad vibes with it.
Recoil is stout!

Thanks for stepping in Gibbs, that one slipped me by.:redface:

Thanks to Mystic for all those pics , if there is anybody that knows P17/P14 it's mysticplayer he shure has put together enough of them and I think could attest to their strength:D
bigbull

Here is a little more eye candy for you 500 Jeffery lovers.
www.hunt101.com
[/url][/IMG]
 
No problem bigbull, glad to be of service.:D

I considered the 500 Jeffery but went with the Gibbs. Seduced by the big case I guess. I have three more sporterised P14's in the case, one of which I will turn into a Medium bore in the 338, 375, 416 range; it's barrel has been shot out. One of the others I will rebuild into a full stock P14.
 
I should add, the 500 Jeffery may be a german invention, taken over by Jeffery. The case is the same as the 12.5x70mm (500) Schuler from what I have read.
 
P17 300wm DM

Here's a few pictures for you Bigbull
p17002.jpg

p17001.jpg

p17003.jpg


The rifle was built here in Prince Rupert a fair bit ago but I don't know when exactly . I believe it was a colaboration between to great local gunsmiths but am unsure of who did what . It's a P17 rechambered to 300 Win Mag . the custom stock is starting to show a few dent's and scratches from hunting but feels great , I recently had it glass bedded . I have no idea of who's trigger it is but it sure is crisp , and fairly light . It still has the stock safety and cocks on closing . The Magazine is custom done , it appears they used two Parker Hale magnum magazines , cut and welded them together so that it lengthened it about 1/4" or so overall . A flat magazine floor plate allows 3 rounds in it . It inserts easily in the gun and feeds really good if you insert the loaded mag in the gun with a closed bolt , if the bolt is left open when inserting the magazine the cartridge gets out of place . A quick push of the thumb solves this PDQ , but a closed bolt works better . Overall a bit heavy but very accurate with fairly low recoil .
 
farmnut said:
PLEASE DON'T SAY P17.
There's no such thing. :shock:

So farmnut you complain about some basic wording of an action type but fail to follow up on as to why your so "anal" about it??

Ive been building guns on the P14 and M17 action for quit a few years now and quess what ......they are virtually the same so get over it its NOT that big a deal;)
 
The proper names are as follows:

1: For the P 14:
A: .303 Pattern 1914 Mk I E (Manufactured by Eddystone)
B: .303 Pattern 1914 Mk I R (Manufactured by Remmington)
C: .303 Pattern 1914 Mk I W (Manufactured by Winchester)
Parts in brackets are NOT part of the offical name

2: For the M17:
U.S. Rifle, Caliber .30, Model of 1917.



However, P-1914; P-14; P '14; Patt '14; Model 1917; M '17; P-17; or P '17 are all acceptable nomenclatre in my opinion. I really do not want to have to write out ".303 Pattern 1914 Mk I E (Manufactured by Eddystone)" just to be correct.

edit. Off course, the british later changed the names in 1926 and the P -14 became the No. 3 Rifle. Just to keep everyone on their toes I guess.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the pic RUPZUK, it's a very interesting conversion with the release inside the trigger bow and the safety lever hidden by the wood is what I also did on my 500 Jeffery.
bigbull
 
Is it the shape of the butt that assists with low recoil? that really is a very nice rifle, let me know if you want to sell it overseas?
 
Reading about these I'm realizing that these are generally used for heavy boomer rifles. Would a modified P17 with a barrel-block supported rig adequately compete at long range shooting? It certainly would have some weight!
 
The use of P-17 almost always brings some comment about the correct model name so

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For the Knotted Knicker set the use of Model of 1917 is incorrect for a Canadian,the common term P-17 was used by the Director of Military Operations and Training in his memorandum of August 27 1940 to the Chief of the General Staff. The Chief of the General Staff then sent a recomendation to C.D. Howe on August 28 that 100,000 P-17s be acquired. So P-17 is O.K.

"U.S. Rifle,Cal.30. Model of 1917",the Canadian Army designated the rifles"Rifles ,Enfield.30/06"

They also used 30 Enfield,and Enfield in correspondance and lists.They had rejected offers of P-14s.Enfield being different than the Lee-Enfield.

Taken from Defending the Dominion by David W. Edgecombe.

So the use of M1917 can be considered a Yankee affectation.But it doesn't matter that much,we will understand you mean Enfield 30/06
__________________
 
I wonder why they rejected the P14s as there would have been common ammo as opposed to the Yank .30 rifles. And just because a general says something incorrectly doesnt mean it has to be repeated as the reason behind incorrect usage now!
 
Back
Top Bottom