I just fondled a Winchester 1917 with heavy 26" bbl chambered for 300 wby. Everything looked ok...trigger was good, and lands/grooves looked sharp. My question is about action strength. Serial # was 66###. I know the springfield 03 actions underwent a double heat treatment after a certain serial number...but what about the 1917 actions. Should they withstand a 300wby? Price was $275, so that's not an issue, but it would be a present for my big little brother, so I don't want the action to blow up in his face when he's shooting it. Any info on Win 1917 actions you guys are willing to divulge, please share. Thanks and Happy Thanksgiving!!!!

Well I'm no expert on this topic but this much I know, my neighbor has two 1917 Enfields that are in hard hitting cartridges, 460 Weatherby Mag and 378 Wby. Mag.
This guy likes to shoot so I know they get used.
Someone else will probably jump in here and be able to tell you exactly which serial numbers got which heat treating but I just thought I'd share that much with you.

Take the barrel and action to a machine shop and have the action rock welled where the bolt connects to action if test comes out 38 to 42 RC it's fine for any mag caliber have bolt done also it should be higher than the action 40 to 44 only safe way to know if it is safe being so old and no history of who may have had someone else doing shop work to it .

The P-17 enfield....and your Winchester is a very good one.....is absolutely fine for the 300 weatherby.

Many have been converted to .375 H&H and the .300 H&H and other cartridges of this nature.

Have a ball and shoot it.....I've never known of heat treat issues with these rifles especially those with Remington and Winchester stamps on them. They're fine actions.....and very strong.

I am a certified Enfield antagonist. I don't like them and never have. My disdain though is all about cosmetics and has nothing to do with action strength.

A small tale here is back in the day, getting really big actions was a real problem. The BKK weren't readily available and Bauska had major issues with that action before he bailed out of them entirely. Brevex Mauser were rare and impoosible to get...Yes there were some very expensive rare actions that no average guy could get, Remingtons of all flavors are too small, WInchester no better, and ZKK mags were banned from importing.

So what was "the" action to build a big cased cartridge rifle on you ask.... Enfields. I have owned and seen I bet at least 50 and probaly closer to 75 Enfields built on big cartridges. These were really the first chice of smiths years ago when you wanted a big rifle built. Not really the first choice, the only choice. THings are different nowddays, there are a lot more options, when your building these big rifles. The only other real choice back then were Weatherby actions, and this was a pretty pricey option to start with as gun parts, also remember that these were still German made, and the cheaper Japanese versions were just starting to be produced.

Enfields lack in beauty bigtime, but they are not lacking in strength. There is a big deal between the three makes of these, and I have witnessed fierce debates over the manufacture of the Enfields. I am not going to partake of that poison fruit, suffice to say do some homework and come to your own conclusions on this, anyway I land one this three sided fence is going to draw criticism.

In the day there was almost a cottage industry working on variants of the 378 Weatherby brass and Enfields, I have yet to hear one incident of issues. They are very strong actions ( and still ugly )

Edit: Does anybody besides me remember dynamite shoots? Back before the BATF banned them? Back in the day half of the rifles on the firing line at these shoos were Enfields...what a blast pity we can't do them anymore.

I had one wearing a.450 Ackley Mag barrel.

On P.O.'s advice I started out using 500 gr. Herter's bullets and 90 grs. of IMR 3031 for loads (in 1961). Let's just say the load was a wee tad warm! Anyway brass lasted one firing per case. Over time as I gained experience and sense, I lowered the load to 80 grs. 3031 (brass lasted about 4-6 reloads), then to 76 grains 3031 (brass life about 10 reloads). The whole while, which covered about 15 years, the rifle never whimpered or complained, or even hiccuped, at all.

Finally sold the rifle in 1976 to a fellow in Saskatchewan, and the last I heard, he was still using it.

I'd have no fear at all using one in .300 Wby., assuming the headspace checks out decently.

Unlike Schromf... I love Enfields... Yeah, I agree they are not pretty and sexy like a Winchester Featherweight....

But I find there beauty in that they are built like a Mack Truck.... unless they are of Eddystone Manufacture...

If the one you are looking at is not an Eddystone.. I'd not worry about it at all...

Winchester built ones are the best... followed by Remington.. and then finally Eddystone....

I don't lean in the directions of Magnums.. but if I did the first action I'd pick is the Enfields, P14 and P 17.....

The other British Enfields are a piece of junk in my book...

IN WW 2 fighters as an anology;

The Springfield is the P 51 Mustang....

The Enfield would be the P 47 Thunderbolt....

Everyone loved the Mustang.. My favorite has always been the P 47! Because it was built like a brick and had one hell of a punch to it!

Cheers
seafire

quote:

Yeah, I agree they are not pretty and sexy like a Winchester Featherweight

Actually I don't think Featherweights were sexy, light and convient yes, sexy no.

Now the part about not pretty is honest, and I have seen a couple with literally a ton of work that were cleaned up to decent. But that was surface ground, ears cropped, bolt hand changed and even extensive bolt and safety work, way more than I would ever drop into a Enfield. And it still was like the girl down the street my mom couldn't convince me to date.

Your analogy of planes I disagree with also, I think C-47 and Enfields are a better match, which isn't all bad in itself.

There are a lot of guys who like Enfields and I have more than a couple of friends that are die hards, I still think they are heavy and ugly. Different strokes for different folks.

Your WInchester vrs Remington brand scenario is one side of that story, the only for certain is most dislike the Eddystone versions. I will stay out this fray, I don't have a dog in this fight and I have heard this arguement over and over.

Your mack Truck analogy was right on though

Count me in with the "die hards". I love my Rem. 30S/458Lott, and one day I hope to get it a "Little Bubba", in 375Wby. For rounds in the 3.6" lenght, this action serves just fine. Would I pick it for a light walk around rifle in 1/4" bore? No. But for the big boomer, I will take one every time.

Hog Killer

About a year ago there was a 1917 Enfield that had been built by Duane Wiebe on GunsAmerica. I cant remember the caliber but I want to say 375 H&H. I dont think it was possible to tell that it started life as a 1917. It was down right sexy!!! But it took a ton of work to get it there.

But I do like the 1917's. I personally fel the actions are way overbuilt for the good old 30/06. A fact that is pretty well proven by so many big bores being built on them. If I remember correctly wasnt A-Square using them for the longest time? But they are as strong as an action as can be found.

But I think they really shine when you find them in the covilian version: Remington Model 30. Talk about one neat rifle!!! But I could do without the dogleg bolt handle. Why remington chose to keep that feature when they were making the M30's is beyond me. They went to a lot of work on the M30s to make them very nice rifles and then left that goofy bolt handle.

But if you want to talk about sweet and sexy aircraft, it would have to be the F4U Corsair or the P38 Lightning. If those 2 planes were women they would be Mae West and Jane Russel!!

As I understand it, the problem with the Eddystone 1917s was the barrels were torqued way too tight to the receivers. When a gunsmith tried to remove that barrel, the receiver cracked, thus earning the Eddystone it's bad reputation.
I worked with an old timer gunsmith for a couple of years prior to his untimely death, and what he would do is place the barreled action in his lathe and turn a cut where the barrel and receiver came to gether. As he explained it to me, this relived the pressure and the barrel could be removed without cracking the receiver.
I have an Eddystone in 30-06 that was rebarreled during World War Two with a Remington two groove barrel that someboby made into a 1960s style sporter with I believe what is a Fajen stock. Unfortunately, the barrel was wrecked by corrosive priming to some degree, but the rifle still shoots well.
I figure that as the Eddystone plane was owned and controlled by Remington, the quality should be basically the same, the big problem being those way over tightened barrels.
You can always test the receiver by soaking it in gasoline for about five minutes, drying it well and applying heat gently with a propane torch. Any cracks will show up as the gas that soaked into the cracks will ooze out.
Paul B.

[QUOTE]
IN WW 2 fighters as an anology;

The Springfield is the P 51 Mustang....

The Enfield would be the P 47 Thunderbolt....

Everyone loved the Mustang.. My favorite has always been the P 47! Because it was built like a brick and had one hell of a punch to it!

Cheers
seafire
[/QUOTE

No doubt but the P-38D was THE plane. Better climb and roll rate than any P-51 but unfortunately 2.5 times the cost. The war was won and why spend that much when all knew jets were the coming thing?

One small and personal note; my father was a war-time P-38 pilot who transfered to MATS (Materiel Air Transport Service) so that he could stay in the service and do the one thing he loved which was flying of any sort.

He started out in post-war in Alaska flying the Aleutians in C-47s which by most accounts was worse than combat.

His CO came to him one day wanting to know if he would volunteer for the new Federal Game Warden program to help corral the local P-38 pilots and others who were having a tough time ramping down from combat ( mind you this was long before AK became a state). Seems they were straffing the local wildlife out of boredom and pissing off the locals. To my knowledge, Dad was the first volunteer federal game warden and had pretty good success negotiating with the fighter jockeys to stop bear hunting in P-38s.

As a sideline he was asked to fly from lake to lake evaluating various locations for potential retreats for military personnel. Tough job but someone had to do it.

I would direct you to this thread
https://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9411043/m/775105663

Tigger:

Great Story!

As far as the planes analogy....

Even tho I listed the old P 47 as my favorite of the bunch... If I had to list my next favorite aircraft of the WW 2 era????

Well it usually wouldn't have been built in Russia... but after that.. I'd have to modify a quote I heard before that was a modification of one of Will Rogers original quotes....

I never met a WW 2 aircraft I didn't like.. I just like some of them more than others...

those were the days my friends.. as the song went..

Thread un-hijacked, LOL.

If the enfield fields well, buy it.

i have done several of these.. and they are, without a doubt, the easist way to win "uglist gun" ... and a darn hard way to make it pretty.

build like a brick bathhouse... generally will work out just fine... and find someone that likes taking the ears off them, and you'll have a fairly nice rifle.

leave the safety ALONE... it's all you need or want.


dogleg? i kinda like them...

but, for a fine rifle, the enfield is the only way to start with a milsurp and spend more money than a muaser...


Thanks for telling us Dad's tale... my (great) Uncle Earl flew bombers out of england... what a harrowing number of tales that is

jeffe

quote:

for a fine rifle, the enfield is the only way to start with a milsurp and spend more money than a muaser...

Yup!!!!!!!!!

And then you have a ton of money tied up in them and there ain't no sunshine there, upside down in a gun, that the only way to get your dollars back is shoot it out.

The M-1917 is correct name,not that it really matters.They were made of nickle steel,the same stuff as pre-war M-70s and the last batches of Springfields.The Eddystone plant was cranking out 6,000 at day,and at those levels of heat treatment skills, some are going to be questionable.The real safety point with them is their gas handling.