Model of 1917 rebarrel

L

ligonierbill

New member
I have a Remington-made 1917 with the original barrel, but sights and stock were changed long ago (not by me). It's a good shooter with aperture and front bead, and I probably will never change it. If I did, though, how are these for barrel changes, scope mounting, etc? I've done several old Mausers (never an original!) and I wonder how the 1917 compares.
 
There were a pile of them rebarreled to various calibers including some belted magnums. I have one I had rebarreled to .35 Whelen. The usual details apply. (It has to be 'fitted'.) I've never heard or read of any problems.
 
The 1917 uses square threads instead of V threads. Modern smiths typically don't have much experience cutting square threads, so you'll need to find one who knows or is willing to learn how if you want to have something other than a factory replacement barrel fitted. Some of the older barrelmakers may be able to provide prethreaded barrels if you ask.

When they were relatively inexpensive surplus items, places like A-Square built lots of custom rifles on 1914 and 1917 actions in everything from 6mm to .577.
 
I learned on a sporterized Winchester. Very accurate hunting rifle. It was a 1" gun all the time! Wonder if we would have loaded for it, how it would shoot. 6 reds in the mag! That gun still has a Weaver K4 on it! I want it back.

Scope mounting is possible, but not sure how....I'm sure some kind of drill & tap required.

Rebarreling happens, but how does the original shoot?
 
From an earlier topic re: low number 03 Spgfld:
I've experienced a catastrophic receiver failure. I will tell you flat out it's NOT something you EVER want to happen.
Over 100 stitches in my face/neck, shattered jaw that was wired shut for 12 weeks, a hole in my neck to breath through, weeks of missed work, weeks of being fed through a straw, lost 20-25% of my body weight, permanent nerve and tissue damage resembling the effects of a light stroke.
Hop right on that train Dude cause my seat is empty.
This was the result of a barrel swap on a P17.
 
One thing to look for on the model 1917 is cracks in the receiver. The barrels are very hard and have some massive torque. A friend of mine re barreled one to .375 in school and we had terrible time pulling the barrel even with barrel vice and wrench. We ended putting the thing in the lathe and using a carbide tool to cut a very deep groove until the threads loosened enough to break the barrel free.

The machining for the barrel is a little more complicated than a typical Remington or such so get somebody you trust with a lathe
 
"...how the 1917 compares..." Same process as a Mauser, but you need a different bushing for the barrel vise. Easily made out of mild steel, if you have a lathe. You also need the correct action wrench. Also makeable with the right tools. Or it's $114.99 from Brownell's. Who also sell just the head for $39.99. Both are listed under General Gunsmith Tools/Wrenches/Action Wrenches. Kind of pricey for a one time thing.
Parkerized barrels with a short chamber can be had in .30-06 or .308 from Criterion at $199.95. Seems only the CMP has any in stock.
Gunparts wants $119.60 for a new .30-06 barrel. No mention of who made it.
Mind you, if the thing shoots well, follow Rule Number One. It works. Don't fix it.
 
As others have said, the Model 1917 is fairly close to a Mauser and Springfield for rebarreling. Like a Mauser in that it has a flat-bottomed receiver, like a Springfield in that it has square threads.

The comment about cracked receivers is spot on, the barrels were put on with a hydraulic machine and the barrel threads fit very very tight in the receiver threads. Machine the shoulder off of the barrel and unscrew the barrel. You can crack a M1917 receiver by putting too much force on it to remove a barrel (they break with a loud "tick", been there done that).

As far as are they strong, I have seen them chambered for 460 Weatherby, 375 H&H, 300 Win Mag, you name it. One maker (I forget which) was more desirable for sporterizing, since milling off the rear sight left a solid surface that could be rounded and drilled/tapped. Other makers' receivers had a large void under the sight that had to be filled with a block.

Remington later put the M1917 Enfield into civilian production, calling it the Model 30 and Model 725 Alaskan. Reception was lukewarm at best because of the number of surplus rifles available and they kept the dog-leg bolt handle.
 
I put this in the kind of just because you can should you?

Finest caliber on the planet and it shoots. Keep it.

The reality is we never know. I saw the aftermath of a Modern Model 70 blow up

With all the better gas relief and a supported case head, it still blew up.

So it can happen to any gun (reloads were involved but even that should only push the proof limits) .

But it does reflect the wisdom. if it isn't broke don't fix it.

If you want a much better setup for caliber changes get a modern Savage action.

Those are not only vastly easier, pre fit barrels you just turn on and tighten up the nut in any caliber , profile and length.

I got one in 7.5 Swiss of all things (most interesting cartridge )
 
Not to worry folks, I am not going to mess with this rifle. Just curious. BTW, I did check numbers to ensure I do not have an Eddystone, some of which had brittle receivers I'm told. This one is a good shooter, as good as my old eyes at least. The WWI "sporterized" bolt gun was almost standard issue for deer hunters when I was a kid, and scopes were rare. Still have the Mauser I carried, and my brother has Dad's Springfield.

Regards choices for rebarrel, I like Mausers. I have a barrel vise and the correct action wrench, and while they are less common now, you can still find guns in various stages and quality of modification at a decent price. My 1935 Brazilian is probably next up.
 
The is a guy who has done a huge number of 1917 barrel changes (bad barrels)

Guys name is Chuck in Denver, business name is Warpath and he is a distributor for Criterion bares (1917 and 1903) )

His findings are that there is no issue specific to Eddystone. It was the most made and it was the most messed with.

Wrong tool use resulted in cracked receivers.

They used a nickel iron mix before Springfield and RIA went to that.

While there is a great deal of Internet myth, the hard data says these were extremely well done rifles be they an E, W or R.

Any issues are induced.
 
I have a Remington-made 1917 with the original barrel, but sights and stock were changed long ago (not by me). It's a good shooter with aperture and front bead, and I probably will never change it. If I did, though, how are these for barrel changes, scope mounting, etc? I've done several old Mausers (never an original!) and I wonder how the 1917 compares.
Click to expand...

As others have indicated, if it is shooting well, you have a great rifle as is. As it has been sporterized and being a Remington, you can reshape the rear sight area and drill and tap it if you really want a scope mount. 1917s built by Remington and Winchester are not hard to drill. However some (all?) of the Eddystones I worked on were so hard that they are a challenge to drill. PO Ackley did testing of the strength of military actions and had the Eddystone blow the receiver ring right off the action at 62 grains of 3031 and a 140 bullet with a 270 Ackley mag barrel. The 1917 Remington tested when heavily overloaded simply stretched until the point the action was not serviceable but never blew apart. I think the final load it took to wreck the Remington was a 270 Ackley mag barrel, 180 Barnes bullet and 68 grains of 3031. FYI: Normally a slower powder like 4831 is used to take advantage of the case capacity but the max load for that round is 170 bullet and 45 grains if using 3031.
 
The comment about cracked receivers is spot on, the barrels were put on with a hydraulic machine and the barrel threads fit very very tight in the receiver threads. Machine the shoulder off of the barrel and unscrew the barrel. You can crack a M1917 receiver by putting too much force on it to remove a barrel (they break with a loud "tick", been there done that).
Click to expand...

The hydraulic thing is a myth. They were put on by hand.

They just go to the Witness mark.

If you take a barrel off you do (or should) cut it first to relive the tension.
 
The only thing I had heard about barrel replacement with a '17 Eddystone Enfield was that the barrels were VERY tight and removal sometimes resulted in cracked receivers.
fortunately, my '17 is a very good shooter & did not need a barrel.
 
According to the guy who has done hundreds, nothing to do with Eddystone.

I will go with the guy who has done hundreds vs that rumor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top