Dad just gave me grampa's 30.06 for heirloom

[Stand_watie]

Tell me what you know about it you guys who are into older guns.

He says it's a Winchester, 'springfield action',  from ww1 era that grampa bought in 1960, that still had packing grease on it when he got it. Serial number 427xxx. He cut down the stock himself.

[lee n. field]

Sporterized Enfield Pattern 1917, I think.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1917_Enfield

[Hutch]

It's an Enfield, likely made by Remington or Eddystone.  Cocks on closing the bolt.  Unlike most bolt actions, the bolt actually cams shut when turned down, and open when lifted.  More Enfields saw action by US forces in WWI than did 1903 Springfields.

[Gewehr98]

U.S. Model 1917 Enfield. 

A very stout variant of the Mauser action.

Yours has been sporterized, and the rear "elephant ears" have been slimmed down to make room for the scope mount.

That Lyman Alaskan scope is a nice find.

This is what the rifle would've looked like in original military condition:

[Stand_watie]

A little more info, and more request for info/advice...

Just above the serial number is

        U.S.
MODEL OF 1917
  WINCHESTER

and on the bolt handle is

USMC
  3

On the bolt just behind the handle is a sideways capital E, and just behind that an upright EN

On the scope which I assume was purchased from a Sears catalogue circa 1960, it says

WEAVER
DETACHABLE
SIDE - 1"

************************

The most important question is this - is it likely safe to use with modern ammunition? I doubt if it has had 500 rounds fired through it since grandpa got it, although apparently at least one box of steel jacketed ammo. I want to long term loan it to my Nephew for hunting (he's literally a subsistence hunter who has to share out a 30.30 with a half dozen others for deer hunting) to increase it's sentimental value to me, and then to him when I die, but I don't want to kill, blind, or definger him in the process. I'd rather spring a couple hundred bucks for a modern rifle for him for safety reasons, but I'm not concerned about retaining the cash value of the rifle, just the heirloom/sentimental value.

[Perd Hapley]

The 1917s are awesome. You are a lucky man. Now you need a 1917 revolver.

[Stand_watie]

The 1917s are awesome. You are a lucky man. Now you need a 1917 revolver.

I'm glad you gave me that idea. To my knowledge I'm the first pistol lover in my family tree. Up until 25 or so years ago, my dad would have told you "Pistols are worthless...no good for hunting, barely good for self defense (because a rifle or shotgun is better)... only good for murder or war." I have to assume that sentiment came from a carried down puritan ethic from grandpa.

Now My dad seems genuinely intrigued and interested in my pistols if only in a detached way, as if in a toy or clever gadget like a cell phone or a computer.

[Jocassee]

The most important question is this - is it likely safe to use with modern ammunition? I doubt if it has had 500 rounds fired through it since grandpa got it, although apparently at least one box of steel jacketed ammo. I want to long term loan it to my Nephew for hunting (he's literally a subsistence hunter who has to share out a 30.30 with a half dozen others for deer hunting) to increase it's sentimental value to me, and then to him when I die, but I don't want to kill, blind, or definger him in the process. I'd rather spring a couple hundred bucks for a modern rifle for him for safety reasons, but I'm not concerned about retaining the cash value of the rifle, just the heirloom/sentimental value.

Probably more than safe. Over-engineered doesn't even cover it. I would have it headspaced however before firing.

Someone more technical please back me up on this but it should be fine with any sort of ammunition.

[HankB]

There's some controversy about Eddystone receivers, but Winchester and Remington Enfields are considered to be very strong - the only fault I've read about with the Winchester actions is cosmetic - there's supposed to be a recess milled under the rear sight that doesn't look very good; most custom rifles will have this filled by welding, but it has to be done carefully or it can warp the receiver and cause the thin metal under the plug to bulge down into the bolt raceway.

In terms of strength, 1917 Enfields are considered to be very good - in fact, many custom makers use them as the basis for rifles in BIG calibers, up to the .500 A-Square, which is a .460 Weatherby necked up to .50. In the original caliber, a 1917 Enfield in good condition will be safe with ANY good .30/06 ammo, and probably provides a better safety margin than many other actions. If you prefer cock on opening, there are kits available to make the conversion.

Another thing I've read is that some had barrels screwed in during manufacture with up to 325 ft-lbs of torque, and some ham-handed gunsmiths put cracks into the receiver when unscrewing them during the sporterizing process. (Proper technique calls for some machining on the barrel before removal.)

One more thing - the ejector has basically a leaf spring machined into it, which has a reputation for breaking - there are coil spring conversions available.

Sounds like a nice rifle - I wouldn't mind having a decent 1917 Enfield myself.

[MechAg94]

IMO, they are nice rifles that balance and shoot well. 

I have a CMP Eddystone that was a parade rifle.  It is all chromed up and very sharp looking, but the barrel is corroded and it doesn't do better than about 8" groups. 

Since the CMP opened their custom shop, I was considering having it rebarreled.  The guy who responded to my email at the custom shop said there was some risk to the receiver, but they thought they could do it.  He said they could either strip the chroming off and reparkerized everything or even re-chrome the new barrel to match everything else.  Not sure what I want to do yet.  I am wondering if it might be better to find another one and get it upgraded and leave this one alone. 

[K Frame]

What a lot of people don't know about Eddystone is that they are ALSO Remington made...

Eddystone was a wholly owned subsidiary of the Remington, but was created from the ground up as a new manufacturer to expand production. The facility was located in Philadelphia on land leased from the Baldwin Locomotive Works.

[lupinus]

Check the condition of the bore and headspace (or, have checked by a component smith). If everything's good I see no reason not to shoot it. Might want to stick to lighter loadings just for a wear and tear reduction.

Sent via tapatalk

[Stand_watie]

What I think I understand so far is that this is an Enfield pattern, M1917, and that they were a sturdy platform that are still safe to fire with modern ammo if no underlying problem with gun.

Does the "U.S. Model Of 1917 Winchester" stamp actually indicate that it was made by Winchester at the New Haven Connecticut plant, rather than by Remington at the Remington plant or by Remington at the Eddystone plant?

If it was made by Winchester, the date of manufacture was October, 1918 according to oldguns.net

[Stand_watie]

I have never found the scope easy to use. Do any of you think a more modern scope would improve it for deer hunting? A higher magnification scope? I'm assuming the scope on it is 4x. What magnification would be about correct for 80 to 300 yard range for deer hunting?

[Hutch]

Lots of opinions about optimum scope for deer hunting.  4x is not bad at all, actually, but more modern scopes will be lighter, gather more light, and offer other advantages.  A variable power scope is very useful, and 3 to 9 power is HUGELY popular.  Just about any El Cheapo 3x9 is optically superior to the current scope.  JMHO.

Unfortunately, putting a modern scope in the best, most useful position will require a lot more gunsmithing on your rifle.  Basically, the rear sight will have to be milled off altogether, and the receiver bridge drilled and tapped for scope bases.  This was fairly popular back when sporting rifles were expensive and gunsmithing time was cheap.  Now, it makes no economic sense, but with heirlooms, that's not likely to be an issue.

[230RN]

HankB noted,

Another thing I've read is that some had barrels screwed in during manufacture with up to 325 ft-lbs of torque, and some ham-handed gunsmiths put cracks into the receiver when unscrewing them during the sporterizing process. (Proper technique calls for some machining on the barrel before removal.)

True, that.  A groove cut into the barrel just in front of the receiver ring relieves some of the stresses on the threads and makes the barrel easier to remove.

However, I replaced the barrel on a Carcano once and could not untwist it with all kinds of torque and grunting and penetrating oil and moderate heating and helper bars applied to it, even though I had cut the aforementioned groove in the barrel.  

Now, years later, I still retain some musculature I developed from that effort.

I then  discovered that they had left-handed threads and it came right off when turning it the opposite way.

This led me to write a little poem, which I printed out and hung on my shop wall:

Breathes there a man with soul so dead,
Who never to himself has said,
After wrenching and twisting and turning red,
"Dammit to hell, that's a left-hand thread!

Terry, 230RN

[Gewehr98]

Breathes there a man with soul so dead,
Who never to himself has said,
After wrenching and twisting and turning red,
"Dammit to hell, that's a left-hand thread!

I am so stealing that!  (With proper attribution, of course...)   

[230RN]

Feel free.

I'm reminded of --was it Chrysler?... lug nuts.

Bear in mind the first two lines are from Sir Walter Scott.

http://holyjoe.org/poetry/scott.htm

I sometimes do "breathes there a man with soul so dead" doggerel to fit certain occasions.  It's easy to  manage the last two lines to rhyme with "ed."

Yeah, I had to look up the word "pelf" in that Scott poem, too. Just to save you the trouble:

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pelf

Terry

REF (lug nuts):
http://www.moparmax.com/columns/magnante/v_5-1.html

[Angel Eyes]

Feel free.

I'm reminded of --was it Chrysler?... lug nuts.

REF (lug nuts):
http://www.moparmax.com/columns/magnante/v_5-1.html

Yep, used to have a '67 Mopar with left-hand-thread lugs on the left side.  Each left-side lug has a little "L" stamped on the end as a reminder.

[Scout26]

So if you could find a 1917 Enfield stock to restore it, would you?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/WWI-U-S-winchester-marked-1917-enfield-stock-/111242455554?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item19e6912a02

[Gewehr98]

That might work, although I'm curious if his barrel has been cut back, too.

Not quite such an easy restoration for the rear elephant ears - they've been relieved for the scope, but not totally removed.

[Scout26]

Just looks the tops of the ears were trimmed.  No pics of the  muzzle so can't tell if the front sight is still attached or if the barrel is still full length.

[Stand_watie]

So if you could find a 1917 Enfield stock to restore it, would you?
...

No, this is just about sentimental value to me. Just that it was my grandfather's, has put a few meals on several tables, and I'd like it to continue down the line as I remember it.

that might work, although I'm curious if his barrel has been cut back, too.

Not quite such an easy restoration for the rear elephant ears - they've been relieved for the scope, but not totally removed

Picture of barrel at top of muzzle, groove for front sight ends about 1/2 inch from barrel terminus



ear





ear

[MechAg94]

If you have the money, check out the Civilian Marksmanship Program website.  They opened up a Custom Shop and will do work on M1917 rifles.  I think they will work on non-CMP rifles of certain types. 
www.odcmp.com

[AJ Dual]

Is Sarconic still the go-to for 1917 stocks and hardware? I've got a Eddystone I inherited from my grandfather and it has no metalwork, ears all intact, and nothing was done to it other than placing it in a Fajen stock.