what would this rifle compare to?

These markings are on a BSA (Marketed by P-H) Model "B" (M/17 in 30-06 but it was also made in .270 Win or in .303 Brit with a P-14).

photod2a.jpg


Post some pics of all the markings and details of the action and it will help identifying what you have. Also, are the BSA stamps on the action or on the barrel?
 
Markings on my rifle are same as in that picture...but crowns instead of those stars. Don't know if that means anything?

The BSA logo is on top of the action at rear, where I have Weaver scope bases covering it.

BSA doesn't appear anywhere else on the rifle.

"Model B"? Would this be the designation under which it was marketed by BSA?
 
A quote--"I have seen and shot P-14 rifles in many powerful calibers, such as .378 Weatherby Magnum...."

Actually, the SAAMI standards, gives the same allowable pressure for the largest of magnums, 65,000 psi, as is given for the 270 Winchester, and the 22-250 Remington.
The 30-06 is given as 60,000 psi, so not too much difference.
 
Well, H4831,
If you consider it that way, then I agree with you. But, in reality 5 000 PSI is quite a bit of a difference... it's the difference between a "standard" "modern" load and a "modern" "magnum" load... Not many loads goes over 65 000 PSIG though... (maybe except the .280 Halger... wich some cold blooded men may still be shooting...)

Sir Springer,
I don't have time for now to take apart my Model "B" but the only "time" there was no viewer's stamps was between 1941 and 1950 (re-started with A B). So, if you have a very, very early BSA sproting rifle it may not have the "viewer's" mark. Let me have a look at my own rifle and i'll let you know what's going on.
And, finally, yes, there was a model "B" wich was the M/17/P-14 with the sight "ears" milled down, using the cut-down military stock tapped for peep sight or later with both peep and scope drilled and tapped holes, a model "D" wich was basically the same, but with a purpose built sporting stock, the model "E" with a lighweight "continental" style stock. All these rifles were marketed by Parker-Hale.
 
Memory stuff here, Dad bought me this rifle when I was 14, about 41 years ago. The original stock did look like a trimmed down military one, with the distinct grooves along the forearm about 10 or so inches long. He refinished it, smoothed out the edges, added a couple of pieces of ebony, and installed a rubber recoil pad.

He mounted a Williams peep on it, so I think it was already drilled. However, he had to have it drilled for the Weaver bases when he mounted a Banner 2.5x scope a few years later. (which was a real big deal to me back then!) I recall him mentioning that the machinist/gunsmith friend of his had a helluva time with breaking bits because the steel was so hard.

Last part of the mystery is where the action itself came from? Which of the three US plants? Or was it manufactured post WW1 by Remington? Any way to tell? Or would the marking indicating this have been machined off by BSA when they put their own logo on it?

I was kind of disappointed that BSA never answered my email a few years back. They had a basic history on their website of their product lines over the years, but no mention at all of anything to do with Enfield conversions.
 
BSA bought a very big bunch (14 000) of both P-14 and M-17 from the DoD. Well, looking at my notes, it seems they started making these in 1949 and had their production peak about 1953. They can be of any of the three manufacturers, but as we understand it they were not only buffed but also re-surface hardened (and, of course, reblued). BSA continued to modifiy ex-military rifles even after 1953 when they introduced their own sporting line, so did Parker-Hale, 'til the late '70s.
As I understand it, your rifle may be an early one, hence the lack of the "private viewer's mark", but it surely went through the Birmingham Proofhouse just because of the stamping on the barrel.
 
Thanks for all the history! Always really interesting to find out where such rifles started out.

I'm certain mine had some re-machining done to the top side in order to clean up after the military sights originally installed. As I noted earlier, this would seem to have been somewhat poorly done, as I ended up with a bent scope tube on my Bushnell Scopechief...which Bushnell alerted me to, but nevertheless repaired no charge. When I had the rifle customized, the smith trued up the mounting surface for me.

Again, super appreciated!!!

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom