thoughts on the P17 in 30.06?

Enfield 1917 .30-06

I picked up a sporterized Eddystone for cheap a couple months. It's sitting in a 60's vintage Bishop stock. Very heavy rifle and nice to shoot.
 
Thats strange...even the american websites i have visited and other little references i've seen say its a P17.


In 30.06 it is a P17, the same design as the P14. The original design was in .303 British because it was designed by the British to replace the SMLE as the Army's service rifle. (They wanted something Mauser-like because they thought their poor showing in the Boer War was due to the Boers being typically armed with Mausers.) WWI caused them to increase production of SMLEs as much as possible in Royal Ordnance factories and let contracts to make more to commercial factories in Britain to equip the huge conscript army. They let contracts to U.S. firms to start making the new P14, but the SMLE did so well in the unanticipated trench conditions of WWI they decided to avoid the challenges of changing their service rifle in the middle of a rather large war. Some use was made of the P14s but they never became the common arm of the frontline troops.

When the U.S.A. entered the war they knew they needed to grow a very much bigger army very quickly, and it was found that their arsenals could not produce their service rifle, the 1903 Springfield, in the necessary quantities in timely fashion. It was also soon realised that with very little re-tooling the P14 factories could make the P14 in the U.S. standard calibre, 30.06 and in sufficient quantities to equip the newly-raised troops. So the British sold their P14 set-up to the U.S.A. at a bargain price, and the American version in 30.06 was designated P17 (it was 1917) and issued to most of their expeditionary force in Europe.
 
In 30.06 it is a P17, the same design as the P14. The original design was in .303 British because it was designed by the British to replace the SMLE as the Army's service rifle. (They wanted something Mauser-like because they thought their poor showing in the Boer War was due to the Boers being typically armed with Mausers.) WWI caused them to increase production of SMLEs as much as possible in Royal Ordnance factories and let contracts to make more to commercial factories in Britain to equip the huge conscript army. They let contracts to U.S. firms to start making the new P14, but the SMLE did so well in the unanticipated trench conditions of WWI they decided to avoid the challenges of changing their service rifle in the middle of a rather large war. Some use was made of the P14s but they never became the common arm of the frontline troops.

When the U.S.A. entered the war they knew they needed to grow a very much bigger army very quickly, and it was found that their arsenals could not produce their service rifle, the 1903 Springfield, in the necessary quantities in timely fashion. It was also soon realised that with very little re-tooling the P14 factories could make the P14 in the U.S. standard calibre, 30.06 and in sufficient quantities to equip the newly-raised troops. So the British sold their P14 set-up to the U.S.A. at a bargain price, and the American version in 30.06 was designated P17 (it was 1917) and issued to most of their expeditionary force in Europe.


And, I believe, the original rifle was the pattern 1913, to be in a rimless 7mm-ish cartridge, to replace the SMLE. WWI broke out, and the Pattern 1914 was an emergency decision to be made in .303, so that existing ammunition could be used.

I will happily be corrected, if in error.

Cheers,

Neal
 
Just can never go wrong with a p17 - especially for $100!!

I would happily take on of them over any other Enfield.
why over any other Enfield, hakx? I will definitely take a look at this rifle...you guys have REALLY perked my interest and curiousity now. on the other hand...I've always wanted an Enfield No.4 Mk.II...mostly because I love their look and because from everything I've read, the Mk.II is somewhat superior to the Mk.I...tho I will bet there are legions who naysay the I vs. the II! LOL!
 
why over any other Enfield, hakx? I will definitely take a look at this rifle...you guys have REALLY perked my interest and curiousity now. on the other hand...I've always wanted an Enfield No.4 Mk.II...mostly because I love their look and because from everything I've read, the Mk.II is somewhat superior to the Mk.I...tho I will bet there are legions who naysay the I vs. the II! LOL!

The MKII trigger is pivoted to the receiver, instead of the trigger guard (like on the MK.I.) It is supposed to assist with repeatable accuracy, due the stock being affected by; moisture, temperature, or humidity, and thus changing the alignment of the trigger to the sear on the Mk.I.

Otherwise, it is better to get a rifle that has the bolt head release at the rear as a plunger, rather than the cut out near the front making it a *.

Micrometer sights are the cat's meow too!
 
And some No4Mk1s were converted to the Mk2 type trigger mount. These will have been restamped when it was done, the Mk1s redesignated Mk1/2 and Mk1*s as Mk1/3. But we are straying here. The P14/P17 is entirely a different rifle from the No1MkIII and No.4 designs.
 
Last edited:
I have about 7 or 8 Enfields. I love the BSA conversions, and they are quite the shooters! I also have a few P14's converted to big boomers. They are strong enough to handle it.

Numrich sells a ####-on-open conversion kit, as well as better feeding kit for bigger cartridges. I've also tried all the after market triggers, and like them all. The COC/COA kit greatly improves lock time.

cheers
 
why over any other Enfield, hakx? I will definitely take a look at this rifle...you guys have REALLY perked my interest and curiousity now. on the other hand...I've always wanted an Enfield No.4 Mk.II...mostly because I love their look and because from everything I've read, the Mk.II is somewhat superior to the Mk.I...tho I will bet there are legions who naysay the I vs. the II! LOL!

The solid stock, Mauser style action w/ the big claw extractor, 30.06 vice .303.
 
Tooner,

It's not a P17. There is no such rifle.

The British nomenclature for the rifle made in the US by Remington and Winchester in .303 British is the Pattern 1914 or P-14.

The rifles made on the same machinery in the same plants by the same companies for the United States in .30-06 is the Model of 1917 or M17.

They were different names assigned by the services that used them for different rifles.
 
And, I believe, the original rifle was the pattern 1913, to be in a rimless 7mm-ish cartridge, to replace the SMLE. WWI broke out, and the Pattern 1914 was an emergency decision to be made in .303, so that existing ammunition could be used.

I will happily be corrected, if in error.

Cheers,

Neal

You are correct, the british were expermenting with a .276 rimless cartridge for future use as the standard militry round. However the Great War intervened. If you ever find a P-13, keep it!!!

For reading, I recommend "British Enfield Rifles Volume 4. The Pattern 1914 And U. S. Model 1917 Rifles" by Charles R. Stratton.
ISBN 1 882391 29 2.

Not as 'heavy' a read as Skennerton's work. Which is asle recommended!:D
 
Back
Top Bottom