Pattern 1914 Enfield rifles - P14

[MD]

The "sporterized" P14 rifles were all over the BC coast at one time. They were popular boat guns. A friend dug the barreled action of one out of his garden and hung it on the wall.

I worked on a guy's crab boat one time and he had a thoroughly rusted one hanging up on two nails behind the stove. I got the action moving and bore cleaned out with WD40 and whatever light oil I could find on the boat but I don't remember if I ever found a cartridge on that boat. A friend bought an old gillnetter and it came with one hung over the bunk. He showed no interest in it all despite being gun nut, having worked for Lever Arms at one time and harbouring a small but interesting collection at home.

One time I was assigned to the fish packer Lady Augusta as cook for one herring season and when I was making up my bunk, there was a large lump under mattress and when I lifted it up there was a P14. I found a spent 303 cartridge and chambered it and though the bolt extracted the brass, it wouldn't eject it. I could have taken that rifle home but I stood it up in a closet and left it on the boat.

 

[nowarningshot]

The heat treat issue on eddystone makes receivers prone to cracking with rebarreling. I've owned a bunch, 3006, 338wmx3, and currently have two; 264wm and 416 Rigby.

Enormously strong actions, easily converted to big boomers. Not lightweight. Unfortunately, much of the knowledge needed to convert these is lost to time as gunsmiths who worked on them would have passed decades ago.

 

[RRCo.]

https://www.okanaganmilitarymuseum.ca/pacific-coast-militia-rangers/

Quite a few WWI vets in that group by the look of it.

https://www.empireadvance.ca/local-news/searching-for-sunshine-coast-rangers-4291393

 

[Potashminer]

Thanks for the pictures. I find is really hard to distinguish P-14 from P-17 from 10 feet away - maybe the finger grooves?? They were different to each other, usually. Inletting under the butt plate was different - P-14 to P-17, but once trap door closed, not that you could tell. If you get to see the left side of the stock, the original P-14 had volley sights, but the P-17 did not - U.K. rebuilds in WWII often re-stocked the P-14 with stocks that did not have inletting for volley sights, so that difference went away, for those rifles. Right side of original P-14 butt stock had a circular medallion inletted into the wood - P-17's did not - that medallion often removed or re-placed with wood insert on various re-builds. The "breeching" - rear end of the barrel - was very different, but not likely to see that very far away. Rear end of barrel - Mk I and Mk.I* P-14 different to each other and different again to P-17. I have tried, and bolts from P-14 / P-17 do fit and close in the other - but that was on actions with no barrels; extractors also exchange P-14 to P-17 - at least the ones that I tried, even though the extractor noses are very different shape and size.

 

[Potashminer]

The heat treat issue on eddystone makes receivers prone to cracking with rebarreling. I've owned a bunch, 3006, 338wmx3, and currently have two; 264wm and 416 Rigby.

Enormously strong actions, easily converted to big boomers. Not lightweight. Unfortunately, much of the knowledge needed to convert these is lost to time as gunsmiths who worked on them would have passed decades ago.

I was not aware of a "heat treat" issue at the Eddystone plant - although, I had read the report written by Julien Hatcher, for the US Military, about the alarming number of "proof test" failures, attributed to improper heat treat - at the Springfield Armoury. P-14 and P-17 were made at Winchester, Remington and Eddystone plants only; the 1903 Springfield rifle was made at the Springfield Armoury - that I know of, I do not think Springfield ever made any P-14 or P-17. Is at least one Model of 1917 receiver here that is cracked - I presumed that was function of being 100 years "plus" old and likely original barrel really torqued in - I do not know if it cracked when original barrel removed, or when receiver was screwed on to NOS replacement . It has been my experience that some Mauser, Lee Enfield and Enfield P-14 and P-17 can really "snap" or "make crack sound" when original barrel tried to be removed - I think those were REALLY torqued into place.

 

[RRCo.]

The workers who made them had a 100% turnover every three months.

 

[nowarningshot]

I believe the heat treat issues, at Eddystone a Remington subsidiary, were.fixed pretty early. Still its somewhat a lottery rebarreling those receivers. These guns were and somewhat still are very cheap magnum mauser actions. Believe the barrel and receiver threads are different than pretty much everything else.

Like everything else, building a custom rifle would be expensive. The ones I bought were all used, a fraction of the cost of the original builder. It's my experience, with all magnum rifles; they're often shot little. I've literally bought magnums with 18 of 20, first box of ammo. Recoil.

Meh, my bad. Milsurp thread, and here I am talking about converting them. Infidel, like a troll at an elf convention.

 

[Potashminer]

"conversions" - I think many were done over the years - throw P14 bolt into P17 receiver - already got the bolt face and extractor done for belted magnum case. P-17 magazine box, follower and receiver feed lips normally handles most 30 magnums. Screw on and chamber a barrel to clearance bolt face and extractor - cut to headspace. Is a P-17 here done up as a 300 Win Mag using the standard 26" military barrel. Another one was done as 308 Norma Mag - that one fire-cracked and "alligator skin" several inches up the rifling from the throat - only a matter of time until a chunk will fall out. And "pride and joy" is one done up as 300 Weatherby - that one required a "custom" magazine box, but was set into an altogether standard P-17 long stock - no alterations done to the wood that I can find. That long stock P-17 had mark / brand for WWII re-build at Augusta Arsenal - I installed a WWII NOS 30-06 barrel onto that receiver. 300 WBY barrel is going to replace that 308 Norma barrel, after I alter that "custom" magazine for flat trigger guard (from "goose neck")

And you are correct - P13, P14 and P-17 had square (rectangular?) profile barrel tenon threads - not Mauser 55 degree or more common 60 degree "V" threads - not sure any other rifles used that thread profile?

Their weakest point, by far, I think, was the tiny little integral ejector spring - was part of the ejector - I suspect if it lasted for 25 rounds, it would last for decades - not sure. Was many found broken here - various solutions like rubber eraser from pencil, coil spring from something, etc. found stuffed into bolt stop box to make them work - I think when they broke, would require rifle to be rolled to the right for fired brass to fall out - if it was let go by the extractor hook - which often occurs with "push up" by next round in the magazine. I read of a solution / improvement in a gunsmith book circa 1950's by Roy Dunlap - Numrich used to sell those - I do not think they list them any more. P-14 and P-17 ejectors are different shape, but both rely on same integral leaf spring "tail" to function.

 

[Potashminer]

I meant both, the 1917 and p14 are great rifles.

I'm so used it, I prefer it over my mauser actioned hunting rifles. I never noticed if it was a mk1* Ill have to look.

Head space is fine, checked. It actually extracted everything I threw at it... I had an s&b case get stuck and the extractor jumping the rim started this unfortunately. Its still 100% reliable as long as I use new or bump the shoulder back on cases right away.

Maybe that bent the extractor slightly. Should pull it and look at it. Hard to believe that would cause an issue as they aren't CRF but its also 107 year old metal.

P14, P17 and the Lee Enfield No. 4 were most definitely "Controlled Round Feed" when feeding from their magazine - is what I think their "genius" that they will also allow single round feeding - which defeats CRF for that round - which a Mauser will not do without alteration.