Advantages and Disadvantages of P14 and P17 actions

1899

1899

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
34   0   0
Location
West
I know of several of these rifles, sporterized, for cheap. They are all P14's and the caliber is .303 Brit. Why aren't these actions used more often for custom rifles? Are they good strong actions? Can they be accurate? I have found Wolff springs and aftermarket triggers. Would these plus a good bedding job give a decent hunting rifle? What about accuracy potential?

What are other advantages and disadvantages of these actions?
 
1899 said:
I know of several of these rifles, sporterized, for cheap. They are all P14's and the caliber is .303 Brit. Why aren't these actions used more often for custom rifles? Are they good strong actions? Can they be accurate? I have found Wolff springs and aftermarket triggers. Would these plus a good bedding job give a decent hunting rifle? What about accuracy potential?

What are other advantages and disadvantages of these actions?
Click to expand...

P14 and M1917 actions are great actions but require a fair amount of gunsmithing to turn into sporters. If you can find a sporterized action/rifle then you're all set to go. The action is very strong and can be used for magnum calibers. For sporterizing, the 'smith usually grinds off the rear sight ears and contours the rear of the action for a standard scope mount. The bolt handle is usually cut off and a commercial handle welded on. Also, the magazine floorplate housing is usually straightened if a new stock is used. The standard trigger is usable, but a replacement commercial adjustable trigger is also an option. Here's a pic of my sporterized M1917:

1917_Enfield_sporter.jpg
 
They can be as accurate or inaccurate as any mass produced rifle. I own a few of them, in various magnum calibers, and I like them. They are a large action, suitable for the full length magnums and Rigby sized cartridges. As mentioned, they do take a little work. Contouring rear receiver bridge (or both bridges, depending on what you want to do), straightening/replacing magazine/bottom metal, trigger work, a decent stock, good bedding, all will help to make these old girls the equal (or better) of any remwinrugsavchester. - dan
 
The ones I know of have had the ears machined off but the floorplate is the style that "sticks out", like a bulge. The stocks are also sporter versions, but nothing fancy.

RifleDude: What caliber and barrel are you using?
 

The actions made by Winchester and Remington are considered to be excellent actions for conversion if you wish to spend a lot of money to get a great finished product.

The actions made by Eddystone are considered too hard and brittle to be converted safely. I know some will disagree with this statement. I am simply passing on what greater minds have determined many years ago.
 
The post war commercial Remingtons look exactly like a sporterized P17. I guess it is properly a 1917. I looked at a 722 (I think) that at first I thought was a P17.
 
I have my grandfathers old BSA 30-06 and its a sporterized p17....who would have made that? Was it made by BSA or some other company? How can I tell?
 
Remington Model 30 and 30S are the post WW I sporting rifles that Remington made from the basic p-14, P-17. They are excellent, if not somewhat heavy classic sporting rifles--the 30S being the more desirable of the 2 versions.

I had a 30S with a Lyman receiver sight on it in 30-06--still wish I had it.

44Bore
 
The P17s were used by the tons by custom gun makers in the USA and England. They were cheap to buy as surplus and very strong actions. As Guntech mentioned stay away from the Eddystones, the Remingtons and Winchetsers are fine , but the Eddystones had hit and miss hardening. I have had a few split along the top of the action while drilling and tapping for scope mounts.
The advantages are controlled feed , long action suitable for BIG calibers and they are strong. Many years ago it was worthwhile spending the time to "dehorn" 1 and make it into a nice sporting rifle, but with the cost of labor now, not economically viable . Still can be done but is costly.
BSA and Parker Hale both had lots left over from the wars so sporterized many as a production rifle, same with K98s, when the cheap surplus supply dwindled, they started to make commercial mauser actions.
Typically the overall quality of the English remans is quite good.
I am not aware of anyone big that did the same thing in the US, Gibbs did a number of them, but no idea how many. Certainly there are FAR worse actions out there. :mrgreen:
 
1899 said:
The ones I know of have had the ears machined off but the floorplate is the style that "sticks out", like a bulge. The stocks are also sporter versions, but nothing fancy.

RifleDude: What caliber and barrel are you using?
Click to expand...

It still has the original barrel in 30-06 8)
 
P.O.Ackley did a series of test on various actions by over loading them. When the case lets go the gases blow through the action.The P-14 design doesn't shield the shooter as well as other designs. Montana were quite careful with their design,making improvements over the "classic" M-70,which was a improvement over the pre-64 M-70 for gas handling.
 
Slash5 said:
The post war commercial Remingtons look exactly like a sporterized P17. I guess it is properly a 1917. I looked at a 722 (I think) that at first I thought was a P17.
Click to expand...

that likely was a Remington Model 720...it has been referred to as "the Caddilac of the Enfields"

As someone else mentioned,..the Remington Model 30 and 30S were the sporter renditions of the Enfield action....I actually owned once a 30S Sporter in 25-06 in a Fajen Aristocrat stock......it was stamped 25 Roberts(not 257 Roberts) but was chambered in 25-06. I found out from Remington that it had left the factory in 1933 as a 25 Remington...rechambered twice it was....shoulda kept it.
 
The post war rifle (kind of depends which war you're talking about, really) could also have been a 725, which is basically a 722 Deluxe, with a safety that looks very much like the P13/14, M17, M30, M30S, M30 Express, and 720, although the mechanicals are much more like a modern 700. The gas handling problems were addressed in the later commercial models (30 and 720), as was the perceived disadvantage of #### on closing. The later remington manufactured P14's and M17's did not have the hole in the rear receiver bridge, so are probably the best choices for sporters, unless you're very good at welding. As Rick mentioned, the heat treating in the Eddystones (which was a Remington subsidiary plant, by the way) was rather hit and miss, the story I read was that the top engineer at the Eddystone plant wasn't going to use any newfangled temperature control techniques be used on his line, by god, he'd judge them by eye (looking at the colour) like god intended, damn young whippersnappers. - dan
 
downwindtracker2 said:
P.O.Ackley did a series of test on various actions by over loading them. When the case lets go the gases blow through the action.The P-14 design doesn't shield the shooter as well as other designs. Montana were quite careful with their design,making improvements over the "classic" M-70,which was a improvement over the pre-64 M-70 for gas handling.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is any different from any other mauser action. Both the P14 and M1917 have gas vents on the right side of the receiver, which of course is blocked by the extractor when the action is locked up, probably negating any effect they would have had. Of course they could never have put the vent on the left hand side where it would have been effective as all soldiers in those days were right handed....... :shock:
Gas handling isn't really at the top of my list for things I look for in an action though.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom