Author Topic: 1917 Enfield to what? (Read 11453 times)

Tackleberry · « **Reply #30 on:** December 12, 2009, 07:06:56 PM »

.338-06 A Square is a commercially loaded round although pricey...but very easy to reload.. I use nickel plated .270 brass and neck it up a couples of times using a .280 and a .30-06 die first.... then to .338..I use .270 nickel since I do not load any .270 nickel case ammunition . commercial HEAD stamped cases are available (again pricey) which is why I use my method. I also do not put more than one caliber at a time on a shooting bench.

AtlLaw · « **Reply #31 on:** December 13, 2009, 07:19:52 AM »

Quote from: SakoDave on December 12, 2009, 06:22:56 PM

a 500 Jeffery.

Now you seem to be a man who knows what a 1917 action is good for!

Unlike your 450, this one looks like it still has the dog leg bolt handle. Does that give you any problem during recoil? $:-\$

SakoDave · « **Reply #32 on:** December 13, 2009, 08:54:04 AM »

Bolt handle doesn't give me any problems at all during recoil, I'm left-handed.

I have a soft spot for M17's, a lot of people will give you a dirty look for using them, personally I think they are one of the better and stronger actions for building bigger calibres, all mine are cock-on opening with either Dayton Traister or Timney triggers, and stronger firing pin springs.
The 450 Ackley is a Remington make, while the 500 is an Eddystone action.

DC

AtlLaw · « **Reply #33 on:** December 14, 2009, 05:39:12 AM »

Quote from: SakoDave on December 13, 2009, 08:54:04 AM

I have a soft spot for M17's, a lot of people will give you a dirty look for using them,

I think that attitude pretty much goes with regard to sportertizing any military rifle nowadays. And I don't think there's any need to chop up a military rifle any more. There are plenty out there that have already been done to one degree or another. "Bubba" has been real busy in that respect!

The OP's rifle is an example.

Quote from: jmayton on November 24, 2009, 06:57:28 AM

I currently have a sporterized 1917 Remington-made Enfield with a badly pitted barrel.

Now he can do whatever he wants to the rifle since he got it "sporterized."

Quote from: SakoDave on December 13, 2009, 08:54:04 AM

...personally I think they are one of the better and stronger actions for building bigger calibres,

And I agree with you wholeheartedly! Oh, and add "longer" to your list of attributes! But the OP said:

Quote from: jmayton on November 24, 2009, 06:57:28 AM

I'm wanting to make it into a light deer/hog/long range target rifle.

and the M1917 is anything but a candidate for a "light" rifle!

Quote from: SakoDave on December 13, 2009, 08:54:04 AM

all mine are cock-on opening with either Dayton Traister or Timney triggers, and stronger firing pin springs.

And that's after the "ears" are ground off, but before the bolt is altered and the bottom metal is redone. Speaking of that, the 450 action is about the best looking modification I've ever seen!

Really nice. You'ld be hard put to identify it as a 1917 except for the safety.

The 500 looks more typical of the sporterized ones I've seen. But it's hard to tell, is the bottom metal "as issued" or has it been modified to a drop magazine?

SakoDave · « **Reply #34 on:** December 14, 2009, 11:27:31 PM »

Bottom metal on both is "as-issued", the 450 wears a Richards Classic 102 stock, with a left hand cheek piece, about the best fitting stock for me that I've come across, the lines of that stock blend really well, you wouldn't know it had a "bent" floorplate.
The 500 has a Boyds JRS stock, not the prettiest stock for an M17, but nice to shoot, as a 500 can be anyway! The 500 holds 2 in the mag, would have been nice to hold 3, but with the follower it has it feeds perfectly, but not enough room for the third round.
In a heartbeat if I had to build another big rifle, I would use an M17, but I believe that there are slightly better actions for smaller or lighter rifles and cartridges.

DC

Lost Oki · « **Reply #35 on:** December 21, 2009, 01:20:15 PM »

I have 2 1917's, one in 35 Whelen Improved in a fiberglass stock and the other is still an 06 in wood.
Both are Eddystone actions and still have the dog leg bolt handle....Which I happen to like...
If I were going to rebarrel the 06...it would be to another 35 Whelen Improved.
You said you wanted a light weight deer / hog rifle....I would go with the Whelen, you can load from
125gr pistol bullets for fun to 250 gr jacketed for serious. Cast in the 200 grain will shoot
cloverleafs at 75 yrds with mine....you can't go wrong. If you want Light Weight....you need
to get a different action.

jmayton · « **Reply #36 on:** December 21, 2009, 04:28:03 PM »

Ok, to clarify, by "light deer/hog rifle" light refers to caliber, not rifle weight. I know the 1917 is a heavy beast and will always be a heavy beast. But thanks for all the different suggestions. Don't know if I'll do anything right now, but I'm leaning toward the 25-06 or the 35 Whelen at this point.

mattl · « **Reply #37 on:** February 10, 2010, 04:01:35 PM »

jmayton,

I would choose the 35 Whelen. If you choose to go that route, you could use the existing barrel by having it rebored and rechambered to 35 Whelen as long as the outside of the barrel is not too pitted. Classic Barrel and Gun Works http://www.cutrifle.com/reboring.html does this sort of thing and they are reasonable.

jmayton · « **Reply #38 on:** September 24, 2010, 06:59:39 AM »

I want to thank everyone for their input. I've been doing more research on caliber, and it finally hit me (I'm a bit slow sometimes) that I'm really not limited to commercial ammo. So I figured that the 6.5-06 is slightly ballistically superior to the .260, so I think I'll go that direction. . . and since A-Square builds their rifles on the P-17 action, it seems like a good fit. I'll put a timney or Dayton trigger on it and order a Richard's Microfit stock for it. I'd like to do a heavy sporter or light varmint contour barrel. It'll be a heavy beast, but it'll mainly be from shooting from stationary positions (deer blinds, vehicles, benches).

Now, the problem I have is finding a smith to do the work. I'm in central Texas, near Austin. Anyone have a suggestion?

one eye joe · « **Reply #39 on:** September 24, 2010, 08:38:24 AM »

Contact Tip Burns. I think he is in the Canyon Lake area. There should be some decent smiths in the Austin area, but I don't know of any. You might check out the Texas Hunting Forum to see if anybody there knows a good gunsmith in Austin.

Frank46 · « **Reply #40 on:** September 24, 2010, 06:44:27 PM »

Here is my two cents. 375/06 Can use bullets from 200 grains and up to 300. And if you are into cast bullets you can go even heavier. Uses regular '06 brass and should you not like the caliber then stick with the '06. Nothing wrong with it and if you don't reload ammo is everywhere. Frank

Mikey · « **Reply #41 on:** September 28, 2010, 01:58:59 AM »

jmayton: Hey buddy, I'm sorry but there is no way you are ever going to lighten up a M1917 enough to make it a lightweight rifle. I've had one of those beasties and regardless of what you do with them they remain about as heavy as a large rock. The only way to lighten them up is to start weight lifting.

As for caliber - well, you said you wanted something that was factory available but lighter recoiling that could be used for varmit, and long range stuff. You will not find that with the 6.5-06 and although you can reload that caliber that will not help if your rifle goes one way and your ammo the other. In the 6.5 bore that leaves you with two real alternatives, the 260 and the 6.5 Swede. The Swede is the more popular round and will more likely be found on shelves than the 260 (which is a shame in my book)..

I believe that a 6.5 Swede on a 1917 action will be both heavy and accurate. I wouldn't go any longer than 24" on the barrel and any 6.5mm barrrel you get will be heavier than a 06 barrel (smaller hole, more metal....).

Also, you may encounter some cycling problems with the shorter cartridges (55mm vs 63mm) and although the Swede is 55mm long it may not be long enough to avoid cycling issues (such as with the 308 from a 57mm length action). I s'pose you could always try the 6.5mm Mauser (6.5x57mm) - just a tad (maybe enough) longer to function better, 6.5mm capability and long range accuracy and possibly shelf avialable. HTH.

jmayton · « **Reply #42 on:** September 28, 2010, 05:58:03 AM »

Mikey, since you just jumped in here, let me catch you up on my thought process by responding with my previous comments to a couple or your points:

You wrote:

Quote from: Mikey on September 28, 2010, 01:58:59 AM

jmayton: Hey buddy, I'm sorry but there is no way you are ever going to lighten up a M1917 enough to make it a lightweight rifle.

But if you had read this, you would understand:

Quote from: jmayton on December 21, 2009, 04:28:03 PM

Ok, to clarify, by "light deer/hog rifle" light refers to caliber, not rifle weight. I know the 1917 is a heavy beast and will always be a heavy beast.

You also wrote:

Quote from: Mikey on September 28, 2010, 01:58:59 AM

As for caliber - well, you said you wanted something that was factory available but lighter recoiling that could be used for varmit, and long range stuff. You will not find that with the 6.5-06 and although you can reload that caliber that will not help if your rifle goes one way and your ammo the other. In the 6.5 bore that leaves you with two real alternatives, the 260 and the 6.5 Swede. The Swede is the more popular round and will more likely be found on shelves than the 260 (which is a shame in my book)..

But if you had read this, you woud understand:

Quote from: jmayton on September 24, 2010, 06:59:39 AM

I want to thank everyone for their input. I've been doing more research on caliber, and it finally hit me (I'm a bit slow sometimes) that I'm really not limited to commercial ammo. So I figured that the 6.5-06 is slightly ballistically superior to the .260, so I think I'll go that direction. . . and since A-Square builds their rifles on the P-17 action, it seems like a good fit. I'll put a timney or Dayton trigger on it and order a Richard's Microfit stock for it. I'd like to do a heavy sporter or light varmint contour barrel. It'll be a heavy beast, but it'll mainly be from shooting from stationary positions (deer blinds, vehicles, benches).

I understand what you're saying, but Ive already been down that road.

Mikey · « **Reply #43 on:** September 28, 2010, 12:02:58 PM »

Oh alright........................

glazer1972 · « **Reply #44 on:** September 30, 2010, 08:27:42 AM »

6.5x55 or 7x57.

JeffG · « **Reply #45 on:** October 04, 2010, 02:17:02 PM »

Quote

25-06 will fill all those needs.

An excellent cartridge!

I made one into a 300 H&H without much fuss, it was a great rifle!

jmayton · « **Reply #46 on:** November 11, 2010, 08:46:59 AM »

Well, mattl got me thinking and I checked out Dan Pedersen at Classic Barrel. Along with that I started looking at larger calibers other than the 35 Whelen. I talked to Dan a few minutes ago and I will be sending him the barreled action to rebore it to 338-06 and if it's really bad, then we'll go to the 35. He is also going to take care of the binding in the action. I'm staying with the -06 based cartridge to simplify the process and keep the cost down. And, it'll be easy to make brass if I need to do so.

M700 · « **Reply #47 on:** January 31, 2011, 05:00:51 AM »

Any update on this project?

Mine is still a .30-06, and likely to remain so, but I'm always interested in these conversions to different cartridges. For my purposes, I think I'd keep it something based on the .30-06 case as well.

Dare I confess that my 1917 is one of my lighter & handier hunting rifles? Did trim the barrel to 21" and put it into a Bell & Carlson stock some years ago. Yes - for all you collectors - mine was "sporterized" by Dad, after he returned from WWII. The ol' surplus 1917's were a dime a dozen back then. It's been a good rifle, and three generations of my family have hunted with it now.

Regards, Guy

jmayton · « **Reply #48 on:** January 31, 2011, 05:11:39 AM »

I refinished the stock and installed a new recoil pad. Now I'm just waiting for the barreled action to come back from Dan, but I haven't heard when that might happen.

jmayton · « **Reply #49 on:** February 09, 2011, 11:14:28 AM »

Just called Dan to check on the progress. The barrel is off the action and waiting it's turn to be rebored. He thinks it'll be done by the end of the month.

jmayton · « **Reply #50 on:** March 03, 2011, 11:47:46 AM »

Newest update: Dan called today and the rebore is done. He'll ship it back to me as soon as he gets my check. Now for dies, bullets, scope, rings, etc., etc.

drdougrx · « **Reply #51 on:** March 04, 2011, 03:54:30 AM »

Good deal J....can you give us a ballpark of what the whole thing costs? I have an 1917 Enfield as well that is stock, made by Winchester and is in Good condition. I've never really considered messing with it because I felt that when I was done, I'd be able to buy a new rifle for the same cost.

jmayton · « **Reply #52 on:** March 04, 2011, 05:34:53 AM »

drdougrx, I had the same concerns that you do, but mine was already sporterized, so it made sense to go ahead and get it shooting again. The rebore and a bit of action work is costing me $369. I refinished the stock with TrueOil, I installed a new recoil pad, and I'll bed it when I get the barreled action back. It'll also get a new trigger. So total for the work and and all I'm doing to it is in the neighborhood of $500. I'll still have to scope it and get dies, brass, and bullets, but that'd be true for any rifle I bought. For me, it is worth the cost to have my dad's old rifle shooting again and to get it in a caliber that I don't have.

drdougrx · « **Reply #53 on:** March 04, 2011, 10:22:59 AM »

I agree! Good job and please post pics!!

chutesnreloads · « **Reply #54 on:** March 04, 2011, 12:42:11 PM »

JMAYTON sound like you have almost same setup as i do.Sporterized '17 Enfield with a wore out bore.Just would like Dad's old gun shooting groups instead of patterns again.

mattl · « **Reply #55 on:** March 04, 2011, 05:34:29 PM »

Quote from: jmayton on March 04, 2011, 05:34:53 AM

drdougrx, I had the same concerns that you do, but mine was already sporterized, so it made sense to go ahead and get it shooting again. The rebore and a bit of action work is costing me $369. I refinished the stock with TrueOil, I installed a new recoil pad, and I'll bed it when I get the barreled action back. It'll also get a new trigger. So total for the work and and all I'm doing to it is in the neighborhood of $500. I'll still have to scope it and get dies, brass, and bullets, but that'd be true for any rifle I bought. For me, it is worth the cost to have my dad's old rifle shooting again and to get it in a caliber that I don't have.

Sounds like a heck of a good deal to me, glad to see an old gun get a new lease on life.

MattL

mauser98us · « **Reply #56 on:** March 05, 2011, 04:11:05 PM »

Quote from: drdougrx on March 04, 2011, 03:54:30 AM

Good deal J....can you give us a ballpark of what the whole thing costs? I have an 1917 Enfield as well that is stock, made by Winchester and is in Good condition. I've never really considered messing with it because I felt that when I was done, I'd be able to buy a new rifle for the same cost.

But when you build,you get it exactly the way you want it. That's priceless

parkergunshop · « **Reply #57 on:** March 06, 2011, 02:19:51 AM »

I have a 1917 in 375 H&H with a Shaw Barrel, I bought a 1914 Enfield Bolt to avoid opening up the 1917 bolt face, it will stay within .6 inch for 3 shot groups at 100 Yds.

I used 1914 Enfield actions for my 270 Winchester, 338 Winchester Mag and 458 Winchester Mag with Shaw Barrels, using a 1917 bolt in the 270 Winchester. The 338 will group consistently in the .3 inch range with my best load, the 270 is a 1/2 gun at 100 yards, and even the 458 Winchester will group under 3/4 inch all for 3 shots at 100 Yds.

The advantage in building on these actions is that you get what you want, better barrels, stocks, and in the end satisfaction of out classing factory rifles in the same caliber.

jmayton · « **Reply #58 on:** March 06, 2011, 03:36:05 AM »

I know that building a rifle or shooting a non-factory caliber isn't for everyone. I don't even suggest it to others. But I like to tinker and the rifle has sentimental value to me. If it didn't, I might not go this route. I will, however, have a rifle in a very useable caliber that cost me just a bit more than a new rifle.

parkergunshop · « **Reply #59 on:** March 06, 2011, 06:04:09 AM »

Jaymaton,

The only Factory barrelled Magnum rifes I have worked on that will shoot anywhere close to my Custom Enfields were a Remington 700 and a Savage 110 both in 7 M/M Mag that were purchased as barrelled actions and glass bedded into custom stocks by me.

Yes, I like to experiment and tinker, that's why I have over 50 sets of reloading dies. I hand loaded and fired test groups for every rifle I worked on. From .222 Remington to .458 Winchester Mag.

The Enfield bolt will clear the lowest mounted scope and it is easy to remove the dog leg, cut off the bolt knob, heat and forge the handle straight, shove the hole in the knob up on the end of the bolt shank, weld in place and, grind and polish, it is easy to do this without over heating the bolt body itself, unlike when altering Mausers or Springfields,

Many of the Springfield bolts are so hard and brittle that you will break them when trying to forge them for a low scope, cut off and weld on a new handle is the best option here, this includes the 03A3's. Mausers forge for low scope with no problem, if you protect the bolt body and cocking cams from heat, but the resulting bolt handle is a little short in length.

The Enfield begs for a 30-06 or H&H length case due to it size and weight, My .308 Winchester rifle is short action small ring Mauser with a 22" Remington Barrel pulled of off a new 700 Action being turned into a Benchrest rifle, in a light weight fiberglass stock with a Lyman 3X scope with a crosshair and post. Point is if want a light rifle start with a smaller action, not an Enfield.