P-17 or Springfield 1903, Which is better?
- Thread starter Shrek
- Start date
Though it is not much of a reason I prefer the look of the M1903 over the M1917, if you want a nice M1903A3 check out this one at Wolverine Supplies.
http://www.wolverinesupplies.com/default.asp?Pg=9&do=3&mcid=1&scid=12&pid=530
P.S. There is no such thing as a P17 rifle, it is either a Model 1917 (M1917) US military rifle or a British Pattern 1914 (P14) rifle.
http://www.wolverinesupplies.com/default.asp?Pg=9&do=3&mcid=1&scid=12&pid=530
P.S. There is no such thing as a P17 rifle, it is either a Model 1917 (M1917) US military rifle or a British Pattern 1914 (P14) rifle.
Model 1917 all the way
I have had both. I first had an 1903 A3 and found it a bit flimsy and with the short sight radius, my shots were all in the black, but not tight. On average 3" grouping. Then I traded some M14 parts and got an amazing shooting Canadian vintage M 1917. I then got a p14 Parker Hale sight for the 1917, and it will consistantly put shots on top of each other from 100-300m. Everyone says that the m1917 is an ugly rifle but when you can hit the x ring all day long, it more than makes up for the looks department.
I have had both. I first had an 1903 A3 and found it a bit flimsy and with the short sight radius, my shots were all in the black, but not tight. On average 3" grouping. Then I traded some M14 parts and got an amazing shooting Canadian vintage M 1917. I then got a p14 Parker Hale sight for the 1917, and it will consistantly put shots on top of each other from 100-300m. Everyone says that the m1917 is an ugly rifle but when you can hit the x ring all day long, it more than makes up for the looks department.
MapleSugar
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- On the loose from NIMH
I have heard that when the Americans retreated from the Philippines at the start of WW2 they left a bunch of 1903’s and Model of 1917 rifles behind with the guerrillas so they could continue to fight the Japanese.
When they retook the islands several years later, the 1903’s were apparently falling apart while the 1917’s were still going strong. So take that for whatever it’s worth.
I have had a Model ’17 rifle and liked it quite a bit; it was very strong and accurate (I could lay a loonie over a twenty shot group at 100 yds.) I only traded it because I’m left-handed. About the only downside is that it doesn’t have a gas shield like the Mauser ’98.
You can get a Timney Sportsman’s trigger for a Model of 1917 that is superb, and Bell & Carlson makes a great fiberglass stock for it (my rifle had already been sporterized by BSA, so I didn’t bubba it.) If you find one in original condition, you are better off keeping it that way.
Anyways, That is my opinion…….have fun with whatever you choose!
When they retook the islands several years later, the 1903’s were apparently falling apart while the 1917’s were still going strong. So take that for whatever it’s worth.
I have had a Model ’17 rifle and liked it quite a bit; it was very strong and accurate (I could lay a loonie over a twenty shot group at 100 yds.) I only traded it because I’m left-handed. About the only downside is that it doesn’t have a gas shield like the Mauser ’98.
You can get a Timney Sportsman’s trigger for a Model of 1917 that is superb, and Bell & Carlson makes a great fiberglass stock for it (my rifle had already been sporterized by BSA, so I didn’t bubba it.) If you find one in original condition, you are better off keeping it that way.
Anyways, That is my opinion…….have fun with whatever you choose!
Last edited:
p-17
If you look hard enough, you can find real nice P-17 rifles. Many years ago century brought in P-17's and 03's. The P-17 were almost new, everyone you got was in the same condition and they sold them for years. The 03's weren't even close to good condition.
If you look hard enough, you can find real nice P-17 rifles. Many years ago century brought in P-17's and 03's. The P-17 were almost new, everyone you got was in the same condition and they sold them for years. The 03's weren't even close to good condition.
Tougher by all measures are the US Enfields.
However this does not necessarily make them a better rifle in my opinion.
Personally I love the 1903A3 that I have. Pretty darned slick rifle. Not the best battle rifles made but certainly attractive, accurate, retains value and the grand daddy of the winchester model 70.
The rifle has lineage.
However this does not necessarily make them a better rifle in my opinion.
Personally I love the 1903A3 that I have. Pretty darned slick rifle. Not the best battle rifles made but certainly attractive, accurate, retains value and the grand daddy of the winchester model 70.
The rifle has lineage.
The U.S. Model 1917 is a well made rifle,...both the rear and front sights are protected with sight guards ,..the action is very strong,...but it is longer overall as compared to the U.S 1903,and heavier ....it is not as pleasing to look at as a 1903,....but...it is a very reliable and accurate rifle,..that will stand up well in combat .
The 1903 Springfield is a nice looking rifle ,...with a smooth bolt action ,...the sights on the 1903 are not well protected from abuse on the battle field ,...though the aperature sight on the wartime produced 1903/A3 are a great improvement.
I have a Remington 03/A3 ,...with a 2 groove barrel ,..it is a accurate weapon that i enjoy shooting ,...
Springfield rifles are rare in Canada,...and expensive ,,...also the supply of surplus Springfield rifles seems to be drying up ,..even in the U.S.
The Model 1917 seems to be more easy to acquire ,...perhaps because Canada during WW2 bought a fair number of these rifles to be used for training and guard duty ,...if one looks closely at wartime photo's of airforce personal on guard duty ,..you can see the use of the M1917 Enfield ,..these were probably surplused out at the wars end .
The 1903 Springfield is a nice looking rifle ,...with a smooth bolt action ,...the sights on the 1903 are not well protected from abuse on the battle field ,...though the aperature sight on the wartime produced 1903/A3 are a great improvement.
I have a Remington 03/A3 ,...with a 2 groove barrel ,..it is a accurate weapon that i enjoy shooting ,...
Springfield rifles are rare in Canada,...and expensive ,,...also the supply of surplus Springfield rifles seems to be drying up ,..even in the U.S.
The Model 1917 seems to be more easy to acquire ,...perhaps because Canada during WW2 bought a fair number of these rifles to be used for training and guard duty ,...if one looks closely at wartime photo's of airforce personal on guard duty ,..you can see the use of the M1917 Enfield ,..these were probably surplused out at the wars end .
Bittermansbro
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Calgary, AB
I have them both and each has its own little differences. For straight accuracy, my M1917 beats my M1903, but I think its just a matter of the two I have as opposed to the whole run. The M1917 looks like a tank and the M1903 is like a ###y bikini model. All personal preference.
OK...I heard some mention of the 1903 A3. There is absolutely no comparison when you are talking about that particular model of the M1903 series. Remember the A3 is a WW2 expedited production type gun, with plenty of stamped parts etc. T
he true comparison that is being asked about is between the WW1 era M1917 and the WW1 era M1903. In this case teh m1903 beats the m1917 hands down. Several reasons. The M1917 had developed a reputation of not being able to retain consistant accuracy in the trenches and ont he firing range....the M1903 proved itself admirably in these regards. There was mention that the M1903 had a weaker action...not correct. The '03 had a feature most guys forget...that being a third locking lug...sometime referred to as a safety lug...the '17 had none of this. The reference of the "weak" action comes out of the early guns heat treatment process which rendered the metal susceptible to fatigue. This was corrected and perfected.
Later (post 800,000 serial # guns) are said to have had the smoothest bolt action action around. Unfortunately very few of us have access to mint unfired examples of these guns in order to test this theory...if anyone has one like this I am sure only gloved hands would be touching it.
As for accuracy side by side I have found that there is no real significant advantage between the two. I have both guns that are WW1 era and have fired them as a comparison. With specific and selective load development the two will produce virtually identical accuaracy. Using generic over the counter ammo the '03 will routinely outshoot the '17.
It boils down to personal preference...Bittermansbro said it right...The M1917 looks like a tank and the M1903 is like a ###y bikini model.
Cheers
he true comparison that is being asked about is between the WW1 era M1917 and the WW1 era M1903. In this case teh m1903 beats the m1917 hands down. Several reasons. The M1917 had developed a reputation of not being able to retain consistant accuracy in the trenches and ont he firing range....the M1903 proved itself admirably in these regards. There was mention that the M1903 had a weaker action...not correct. The '03 had a feature most guys forget...that being a third locking lug...sometime referred to as a safety lug...the '17 had none of this. The reference of the "weak" action comes out of the early guns heat treatment process which rendered the metal susceptible to fatigue. This was corrected and perfected.
Later (post 800,000 serial # guns) are said to have had the smoothest bolt action action around. Unfortunately very few of us have access to mint unfired examples of these guns in order to test this theory...if anyone has one like this I am sure only gloved hands would be touching it.
As for accuracy side by side I have found that there is no real significant advantage between the two. I have both guns that are WW1 era and have fired them as a comparison. With specific and selective load development the two will produce virtually identical accuaracy. Using generic over the counter ammo the '03 will routinely outshoot the '17.
It boils down to personal preference...Bittermansbro said it right...The M1917 looks like a tank and the M1903 is like a ###y bikini model.
Cheers
- Location
- Downtown Vancouver, BC
I had a M1917 that had the stock cut down. It was extremely accurate and was brilliant to shoot. Very slick action.
I would urge you to ge an M1917 if you want a good milsurp shooter. They're amazing.
I would urge you to ge an M1917 if you want a good milsurp shooter. They're amazing.
MapleSugar
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- On the loose from NIMH
Have you ever held one?
The third locking lug on the Model of 1917 rifle is where the dogleg bolt-handle fits into the receiver upon closing...
Last edited:
The M1917 does have a safety lug. The bolt handle fits into a groove in the body.
The M1905 sight on the 03 has a battlesight set for a totally unrealistic 547 yds and requires the leaf to be raised for realistic combat ranges. The raised leaf would be subject to damage and makes carrying the arm difficult since it is at the point of balance. The M17 has the point of balance covered by the handguard which makes carrying a hot rifle easier, a feature the 03 lacks.
The M1905 sight on the 03 has a battlesight set for a totally unrealistic 547 yds and requires the leaf to be raised for realistic combat ranges. The raised leaf would be subject to damage and makes carrying the arm difficult since it is at the point of balance. The M17 has the point of balance covered by the handguard which makes carrying a hot rifle easier, a feature the 03 lacks.
Have you ever held one?
The third locking lug on the Model of 1917 rifle is where the dogleg bolt-handle fits into the receiver upon closing...
I have had over 15 different M9103 in the collection and nearly 10 M1917/P14 in the collection over the years
No I have never held either one???? Dumb question.
I am glad there are some guys who were able to correct that. I was wrong on that regards.
Cheers
MapleSugar
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- On the loose from NIMH
I have had over 15 different M9103 in the collection and nearly 10 M1917/P14 in the collection over the years
No I have never held either one???? Dumb question.
I am glad there are some guys who were able to correct that. I was wrong on that regards.
Cheers
Wow! Ten Model 1917 rifles. I'm impressed! I've only owned one.
I would have thought after having to work that bolt you would have become acutely aware of that third lug. Maybe it's just because I'm a lefty (and it was such a b**ch to do the reach over) that I remember so vividly.
Next time I go to a milsurp gunshow I want to cruise the floor with you. At least we wouldn't have to fight over the same rifles. You can snap up all the 1903's and I'll swoop down on the 1917's!
Bittermansbro
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Calgary, AB
I've only had/have one M1917, so I don't have the experience that Alonzo has had. Like with any of these 'compare this and that' questions on a public forum though, everyone's got a different opinion. I like 'em both just because they make up my US martial arms collection, so I appreciate their history and circumstances of existence more than anything.
Wow! Ten Model 1917 rifles. I'm impressed! I've only owned one.
I would have thought after having to work that bolt you would have become acutely aware of that third lug. Maybe it's just because I'm a lefty (and it was such a b**ch to do the reach over) that I remember so vividly.
Next time I go to a milsurp gunshow I want to cruise the floor with you. At least we wouldn't have to fight over the same rifles. You can snap up all the 1903's and I'll swoop down on the 1917's!
It's a deal!!!!!!!!!!!! Next gun show bud!!!!!
Being a lefty you are staring at big assed bolt handle with every shot...never even though of the safety lever being in the way either.
I have spent too much time staring at those beautiful M1903's.
MapleSugar
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- On the loose from NIMH
Staring at a bolt-handle (and having it inches from your nose) isn't fun.
The safety is actually easier for me because I just flick it up with my thumb. The safety on a No.4 Mk.I is actually more of a pain for me because I have to release my grip on the stock to work it.
The side-swing safety on a right handed Model 70 is actually perfect for a lefty because it is an easy thumb manipulation (while still being able to grasp the stock and cover the trigger.)
