I finally got my M1917

[tahunua001]

hello all,
well I finally lost the low serial springfield argument. after nearly 2 years of not shooting my low serial number springfield I was offered a straight across trade for a model 1917 and I took it. the surface shows quite a bit of pitting, but internals and moving parts are all clean. I do have many questions about it though.
1. man this thing is a mix master. it's about a 50/50 split between remington and eddystone parts and a winchester stock(remington receiver). is there any reason that one of these guns would legitimately contain so many different parts?
2. it's a CAI import, the barrel is so heavily pitted that the CAI etching is the only markings that are still identifiable. pitting has been recovered by bluing rather than parkerizing. who all were these rifles loaned/sold to overseas and did any of them blue parts that were rusted?
3. there are no US proofs or inspectors marks, wouldn't this have the same type markings as a springfield of the same period?
4. barrel has been counterbored, did any of the countries that used the M1917 counterbore?

the obligatory pictures.




and now the current american sisters.

[highpower3006]

It's a mixmaster because it went through an arsenal test and rebuild at some point in it's life. I have handled quite a few of these and an all-matching M1917 is very rare. I would say on a par with a all original M1 Garand. Oddly enough, you are way more likely to get a matching rifle out of the UK than you are to get one from the US that still has all it's original parts.

Don't worry about it, it is what it is, and that doesn't make it less cool to have and shoot. I picked up a Winchester '17 a few years ago and the only thing still Winchester was the receiver, barrel and bolt. Everything else is Eddystone.

[James K]

No U.S. arsenal would have used those rusted parts in a rebuild, and the U.S. never counterbored muzzles to restore accuracy. Those things were likely done by whatever country inherited that rifle post WWII. The reblue job was likely done by an importer.

The Model 1917 had a different set of inspection markings from the Model 1903. There was no stock cartouche or proof mark. The proof was an eagle head on the left receiver rail (I see what looks like the remains of that marking), and other eagle heads were inspector's markings.

Jim

[10-96]

That's still a fine looking 1917 from what I can tell. No need to fret too much on the barrel... http://oldguns.net/catacc.htm#Barrel

Your barrel- I kind of doubt that CAI went to the trouble of counter-boring the barrel. Scout around on the link I posted above- they have some 1917 info available (along with a good replacement barrel and other parts. They also have a parts swap section in there somewhere so you can work with them to get more parts to match your receiver.

As far as who used them- that's a fairly long list:

Users[edit]
Australia
Denmark: From 1953 in Home Guard—currently in service with the Slædepatruljen Sirius in Greenland
France
Honduras: Made for 7mm
India
Ireland: Around 20,000 used by the Local Defense Force during the Emergency (World War II)
Latvia: Used in the Latvian War of Independence
Malaysia
Netherlands: lend-lease from USA
New Zealand
Norway: Used after World War II
Philippines
Portugal
South Korea: used during the Korean War
South Vietnam: used during the Vietnam War

And Japanese Constabulary Police Forces used them after the fall of the Philippines in WWII.

[tahunua001]

No U.S. arsenal would have used those rusted parts in a rebuild, and the U.S. never counterbored muzzles to restore accuracy. Those things were likely done by whatever country inherited that rifle post WWII. The reblue job was likely done by an importer.

The Model 1917 had a different set of inspection markings from the Model 1903. There was no stock cartouche or proof mark. The proof was an eagle head on the left receiver rail (I see what looks like the remains of that marking), and other eagle heads were inspector's markings.

I kind of figured that the rust would not have made it through a rebuild. the bluing done by an importer makes sense although I have yet to find a century imported firearm with good bluing... not that they don't exist I'm just saying I've never seen one. I feel better about the stock now that I know they didn't proof or cartouche the wood.

10/96, I figured the counterboring was either done by the nation it was loaned to or by a person that bought it after it was reimported. that is a long list, I guess it'll be a long battle to find which of those countries this rifle came from.

[10-96]

Tahunua, I'm not so sure that rifle was re-blued by a non-governmental entity. My computer does not have the best screen resolution/clarity but it looks quite similar to the finish on mine which does not have a CAI or any other import stamp. Most of those were not parkerized like the Garands and 1903A3's by any nation AFAIK.

And on mine- it came without a sling and the stock was broken off at the wrist, so I picked up 1907 Kerr sling which I unnerstand to be correct for stateside 1917's. The 1903 leather slings were probably more common overseas.

And yup, mine is a mix-master too. It's an Eddystone receiver and bbl, but everything else is Remington and Boyd's. I lucked out I guess- it's got a pretty slick action and it shoots pretty well- roughly 3.5" 10rnd groups off of a rest at 100yds. The outside of my bbl is rougher than a cob, but the inside is suprisingly clean and sharp.

[Romeo 33 Delta]

Tahunua ... not bad at all (especially considering the trade deal). If she's got a decent bore, she'll make a nice shooter. For my part, I'd rather have a less-than-perfect looking shooter than an unissued safe queen any day.

[tahunua001]

oh, I'd rather have the safe queen as long as it was all original, but I am actually feeling pretty good about this trade.