Enfield "P 17" action
- Thread starter longknife
- Start date
Well, as long as we're naming them. I had a buddy who engraved "Hammer of Thor" on a gun once. - dan
As far as actions being brought to hardening temperature by "eye" that was Springfield actions, made at Springfield armory and Rock Island armory, below 850,000 for Springfield and 250,000 for Rock Island.
There is no such thing as a high number Enfield, that is a term used in reference to SPRINGFIELD 1903'S
There is no such thing as a high number Enfield, that is a term used in reference to SPRINGFIELD 1903'S
I've always wanted to build a 404 jeffrey on a M17, but brass seems pretty rare. What is the most common method of getting a fat/blunt bullet to feed in these? I've seen firsthand when 'bubba' grinds the feed ramp too far, and the bottom recoil lug magically disappears. Has anyone tried the 'tru-feed' kit, and what does it involve?
Last edited:
I have seen one Eddystone with a hairline crack in the bottom of the receiver ring. Have no idea how or when it got there. As mentionned, if you want to debarrel an Enfield action, cut a relief groove just in front of the receiver ring.
Are you referrring to 'drawing down' the steel. I have seen a high # win reciever (M17) that was simply too hard to drill and tap. A local machine shop put the receiver into their oven, brought the temp to 'x' degrees, and slowly brought it down (according to the steel composition).
It was easier to drill and tap after that, but fairly hard compared to the modern steel in guns today.
I have a 300 H+H imp. that was built on an Eddystone US 1917 action. It fired only 6 shots when the guy that owned it noticed a crack in the receiver on the right side. The barrel was removed and the action replaced. I suspect the action was cracked when the original barrel was removed. I bought the rifle as the owner was afraid this may crack again. The enfield receivers are thin wall, and the Eddystones seem to be extremely brittle. Many yr. ago a fellow brought a 300 Weatherby back to Al Petersen. The barrel was loose. When examined it was found the receiver was cracked. I don't recall the mfg. of that one.
If you have the time and/or the $ an enfield custom is a very nice trouble free action. When cleaned up they are more streamlined than any of the magnum length actions avail. There are a couple of gunsmiths in MT. that make beautiful rifles from them. About $10k. or so.
As to your original question, US 1917 actions would be my choice for a 30-378, I started one myself but never finished it. I would get the action magnafluxed and go from there, Mark
If you have the time and/or the $ an enfield custom is a very nice trouble free action. When cleaned up they are more streamlined than any of the magnum length actions avail. There are a couple of gunsmiths in MT. that make beautiful rifles from them. About $10k. or so.
As to your original question, US 1917 actions would be my choice for a 30-378, I started one myself but never finished it. I would get the action magnafluxed and go from there, Mark
The Eddystone factory was making 6,000 at day.The needless fear of the LH Enfield rifling twist had them putting them on with a machine,tight.
The Canadian Army used them during WWII .
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.In fact, the training manual reffered to them as P-17 .
"U.S. Rifle,Cal.30. Model of 1917",the Canadian Army designated these rifles as"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
The Canadian Army used them during WWII .
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.In fact, the training manual reffered to them as P-17 .
"U.S. Rifle,Cal.30. Model of 1917",the Canadian Army designated these rifles as"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
Last edited:
A few years ago I read an article on the reason the Eddystone's were so hard. If my memory is correct it was written by Tom Burgess. In the article it said that in the Eddystone factory where the receivers were forged, had a habit of turning up the temperature of the furnace that heated the steel for forging. This, if I remember correctly made the forging process easier and quicker by allowing a longer time in the forge or less return trips to the furnace. Apparently, whoever was in charge had to continuously turn down the temperature, but the guys on the floor kept turning it up to make it easier to keep up with their quota. In the process the metal ended up brittle and heat treatment will not fix it.
This is about the best I can remember of the article. I thought I had saved it but I can't find it.
Hart
This is about the best I can remember of the article. I thought I had saved it but I can't find it.
Hart
Roy Dunlap said in his gunsmithing book - "making a fine sporting rifle from a military battle rifle is much like trying to make a sports car from an army jeep". He wrote that he'd done plenty of custom work on them but thought it better to build on a new action. The tolerances on some military actions were quite loose and by the time they are polished the bolts are sometimes floopy when pulled back.
But I do have a M17, Eddystone with a sporter stock. Everything else is as it was. I've shot the rifle and it shoots just fine (30-06). It's in nice shape; tight, no rust, good bore. Anyone wants it I'll trade for something else. I've got nice pre-64 M70's so it's one I wouldn't miss.
Regards:
Rod
But I do have a M17, Eddystone with a sporter stock. Everything else is as it was. I've shot the rifle and it shoots just fine (30-06). It's in nice shape; tight, no rust, good bore. Anyone wants it I'll trade for something else. I've got nice pre-64 M70's so it's one I wouldn't miss.
Regards:
Rod
If Tom said it, odds are very, very good that it's true. I've communicated with him many times (although not lately), a great craftsman and a real gent. - dan
My 404 Jeffrey is on a P14 built by my brother...don't know what he did to make it feed, but its totally smooth and an awesome shooter.
Brass is easier to find than I expected and Hawk bullets are a good hunting choice.
Read Hatcher's Notebook. He mentions incidents where early Rock Island and Springfield M-1903. I believe you're confusing the 1917 Enfield with the 1903 Springfield. There were some early 1903 Springfield actions that were hardened by case hardening at both the Springfield Armory and the Rock Island Arsenal. The rifles were manufactured with "low carbon" WD 1325 steel that were not "double heat treated" like later models (After serial #800000).
Hatcher does not make mention of much except misinformation regarding excess headspace being reported on the M-17 due to folks not knowing how to use headspace gauges.
P.O. Ackley tested a M-17 Eddystone rifle to failure and that point was well beyond reasonable factory and handloads.
If there were any failures of the M-17 Mr. Hatcher would have included those in his notebook as that was his job as a military armourer.
Does your brother able to do another? I'm having trouble finding a reamer in Canada. I might have to buy my own from Dave K.
1bigrn
CGN Regular
whats the difference
ok! other than the obviouse difference betweenthe 30/06 and 303 cal. What is the main differences between the two rifles.
Also ifI was to build one up what woulod be the prefewred choice.
Finally can the action handle a 338 remington ultra mag.
or 300 win mag.
Im really leaning towards the 338 ultra mag?
ok! other than the obviouse difference betweenthe 30/06 and 303 cal. What is the main differences between the two rifles.
Also ifI was to build one up what woulod be the prefewred choice.
Finally can the action handle a 338 remington ultra mag.
or 300 win mag.
Im really leaning towards the 338 ultra mag?
The bolt face on the 14 has a little tab that the 17 doesn't, apparently this makes the 14 preferable for the real biggies like the .505 Gibbs. Either action will be fine for Ultramags or standard magnums.
Let me put it this way ...................... YES!!
I had my 505 Gibbs built on a eddystone P14 action. God I miss that rifle!
