U.s. P14
- Thread starter Norseman
- Start date
I have a nice eddystone in another country, but that country has a real crappy system for exporting firearms! The P14 was developed in response to the Boer war, I believe, and many Brits thought the Mauser action was the way to go. As it turned out the SMLE was fine. I believe Vickers produced some p14's, but they later got winchester, eddystone, and remington to manufacture them. They made and excellent sniper due to their weight. A very fine rifle, all round, if a bit heavy. Personally, I prefer them to SMLE's.
Got one in 30-06, a US M17 commercialy "Bubbaed" by BSA, and one in 300 magnum Bubbaed by Century from a P-14, I think, with a synth stock, new barrel, ears ground off and D&T for scope mounts. With a 4x Leupold its taken an elk, a moose, a deer and several black bears.
Neighbour across the street says he has one stashed up-country that is all original, clean, barely shot and in perfect conditon.
Neighbour across the street says he has one stashed up-country that is all original, clean, barely shot and in perfect conditon.
I own a Winchester built P14 [1916 manufacture] It has been bubba'd a bit and has a Timney trigger/Boyds Laminate stock. It shoots into an inch with loads it likes, and is on a par with the 308 Winchester for velocity. I am itching to take some game with it this fall, and will report when that happens. Regards, Eagleye.
f_soldaten04 said:
The Boer War ended in 1901 and the P14 wasn't in development until 1913. Contrary to Wikkipedia's writeup on the P13, It was NOT developped as a response to anything that happened in South Africa over a decade earlier.
The rifle developped after the Boer War was the SMLE Mk1 and then in 1907 the SMLE MkIII. These were made to address the shortcomings of the (long) Lee Enfield Mk1* with its poor sights, lack of charger loading, etc.
The P14 was developed specifically as the P13 b/c the .276 Enfield cartridge had just been invented (based on the Canadian .280 Ross cartridge) and the SMLE action couldn't handle the hot round. The call went out for a rifle that could handle it b/c the brits felt it would be a strategic advantage to have such a speedy and flat shooting round that wouldn't require troopies to adjust sights for any distance up to 500 yards or so. The .276 was ballistically similar to the modern 7mm Rem Mag.
The P14 was built because when WW1 broke out on August 11, 1914 the P13 was still a prototype. Rifles were needed and all available ammo was .303" mkVII ball. Therefore the contract to produce the P13 in the P14 .303 variation was let to American firms to suplement domestic rifle production.
Vickers never made the P14. It was only made by Winchester, Remington and the Remington Eddystone factory at the old Baldwin Locomotive works. RSAF Enfield made a handflu of protoype P14's on their P13 tooling, but these were mostly sent to the US as pattern room examples to help the American contractors to tool up for the new rifle.
I trust that clears things up for you.
Last edited:
Edit to add: Also wrong in the Wikkipedia article that it appears you have read is that the P14 is based on the Mauser. This is, in fact, false. The only "Mauser" features of the P14 are the extractor claw, two opposed front locking lugs (actually copied by Paul Masuer, not invented by him) and charger loading (which all serious battle rifles had by then).
The P14 is a bit unique though as it is neither #### on opening nor #### on closing. It actually half-cocks on opening and completes the cocking cycle on closing. It does not have the trademark Mauser bolt guide rib and uses a unique trigger assembly to facilitate the cocking pattern of the bolt. In addition, it does not use the Mauser gas handling system with a large gas shield on the bolt shroud and that vents through the magazine, instead venting gases out the side of the receiver ring like an Enfield. The P14 has a receiver mounted safety system, not a bolt mounted safety. Finally, the P14 uses rear aperature sights, not the Mauser tang site system.
Calling the P14 a "Mauser based gun" is like saying "all front locking bolt actions are Mausers" which is obviously false.
Now the M1903 Springfield, on the other hand... well, it's a flagrant Mauser copy. So much so that the Americans paid royalties to Mauser until they felt no longer obliged to do so when they went to war with Germany in 1917.
The P14 is a bit unique though as it is neither #### on opening nor #### on closing. It actually half-cocks on opening and completes the cocking cycle on closing. It does not have the trademark Mauser bolt guide rib and uses a unique trigger assembly to facilitate the cocking pattern of the bolt. In addition, it does not use the Mauser gas handling system with a large gas shield on the bolt shroud and that vents through the magazine, instead venting gases out the side of the receiver ring like an Enfield. The P14 has a receiver mounted safety system, not a bolt mounted safety. Finally, the P14 uses rear aperature sights, not the Mauser tang site system.
Calling the P14 a "Mauser based gun" is like saying "all front locking bolt actions are Mausers" which is obviously false.
Now the M1903 Springfield, on the other hand... well, it's a flagrant Mauser copy. So much so that the Americans paid royalties to Mauser until they felt no longer obliged to do so when they went to war with Germany in 1917.
- Location
- WMU248 near Edmonton
I have 2 an ERA and a RE, now I just need to find a farmer who wants to sell his old winchester army rifle for $40 and I'll have the full set 
I have nothing to add to clavens post
I have nothing to add to clavens post
- Location
- Atascadero, California USA
I have an all Winchester P14 with the long range dial sights-it didn't go through the Weedon Standard Repair. Very nice shooter, very smooth bolt. While some may complain about it's weight it is a steady rifle to shoot lending itself well to marksman work on and off the battlefield. If I am not mistaken the Winchesters were designated as the manufacturer type that were chosen to use as " sniper " rifles with either a refined rear metallic sight or the then current optical sights. In any case they are nice rifles, robust and reliable and strong. The war just came in at a time when the British could not afford to change tooling and meet the obvious troop demands with a new rifle. I think less than a thousand of the P13s were made but I could be way off here. Joe
I bought a .303 P14 today. Serial number starts with ERA. Does this indicate Eddystone?
This is in really nice shape. I am still pinching myself...The forend was cut and reattached at some point, someone said it was a duffle bag gun...
I never wanted one of these, but I couldn't leave this there. Tom
This is in really nice shape. I am still pinching myself...The forend was cut and reattached at some point, someone said it was a duffle bag gun...
I never wanted one of these, but I couldn't leave this there. Tom
Claven2 said:
Actually I just checked Woodchoppers site, It says ERA is an EddydstoneGibbs505 said:
I have Stratton's book and read that too. IMHO he's wrong. Smarter men than him (Skennerton, Herb Woodend, etc.) maintain the prototypes were made at Enfield. I tend to believe them.
Vickers did get the contract to produce the rifles after prototyping, but couldn't get production going so it was redirected to the USA.
I think the Vickers data that confused Stratton is that they built about 1200 "Pattern 13" 130mm Naval guns for a Russian contract and he took it to mean they built Pattern 1913 rifles.
Here's a "Vickers Pattern 1913":
Of course, this is just my "educated guess" opinion - He could be right and I could well be wrong
You decide!
Last edited:
