1903a3 and M1917

[Jim Watson]

From before I had a webputer.

[F. Guffey]

And then with all of this talent on this forum where did you first notice the story you remember?

From before I had a webputer.

I guess that when be 'when' and then there is where. Many years ago I gave credit to the author of the information.

F. Guffey

[RC20]

Today most smiths believe they are rediscovering the past but in the old days they rated receivers from best to worst. The worst M1917 was the Eddystone, today it could be rated as the box of chocolate; you never know what your are getting. I have a M1917 that is cracked; I did not pay much for it and the sum of parts made it worth while.

This is a classic case of repeating Internet Rumors that deriving from rumors in the day.

To put the issue straight on the 1917s cracked receiver myth.

Eddystone, Remington and Winchester all used Nickel Steel in those guns (Springfield and RIA were still using non nickle)

None of them had any issue either during or post WWI. That does not preclude an occasional bad receiver, but none of them had any chronic issues. Heat treating was done by a lead bath at the right temperature.

What we do know is that Eddystone made about twice the number of rifles that either Remington did and close to 3x Winchester) Ergo, Eddystone were the most common and most likely to suffer from bad gunsmiths.

When in doubt, see if you can find someone who works with them. I did, he goes by the handle of Chuck in Denver. You can read his posts on CMP Bolt action.

He re-barrels the 1917s under the Moniker of Warhawks (Criterion makes new barrels for 1917s) .

His actual hands on work shows that the cause of the cracks is mis use or lack of use of the right tools. Take off any of them with a pipe wrench and a vice and you stand a chance of cracking them.

As a lot were re-barrled and either individuals or gun smiths who were ignorant or just plain ugly craftsman, you wound up with cracked receivers out there that may or may not get caught by the next owner.

Chuck has seen fewer Eddystones cracked than W or R. Luck of the draw or maybe people wanted the rarer and supposedly better W or R and did barrel changes (as well as caliber changes) on them.

Using a limited data set (one) and then linking it with internet rumors makes for a bad statics set.

[Jim Watson]

Quote:
From before I had a webputer.

I guess that when be 'when' and then there is where. Many years ago I gave credit to the author of the information.

F. Guffey.

Unfortunately my library was burnt up in 2010 and I no longer have those 50 years of references.
Also, I don't consider literature cites necessary in casual conversation.
If it were load data or for a purchasing decision, I would look it up.

[F. Guffey]

Also, I don't consider literature cites necessary in casual conversation.

I can not tell you I know how you felt about the fire and your loss because that has never happened to me. In the beginning I did know everything so I set-off to fill a library; when finished most of what I did not know was no more than an arms length away.

Forgive.

F. Guffey