M1917 Enfield?

Absolutely! They are one of the strongest actions around and a ton (literally) of fun.and, yes, military surplus rifles are highly addicting.

Carl

The '17 Enfield is one of if not the strongest mil-sup bolt rifle ever made.
Controlled feed (a la Mauser) very long action. Replacement triggers are inexpensive to yield a nice 3# break, new barrels are available from the CMP, Parts are readily available from several retailers.
They make a nice sporter if you are of a mind or a nice piece of military history.
See http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=629774 for accuracy results.

Roger

Just to be contrary.....I've always thought that the 1917 Enfield was too heavy and too clunky to be very desireable. I'll admit that it is hell for strong, but the GI's who used them usually preferred the '03 Springfield by a large margin. Note that after WW1, the Enfields mostly went into storage while the Springfield continued to be issued until replaced by the Garand. The Brits kept their SMLE's over the Pattern 14 which was supposed to replace it, and was the same as the 1917, basically, except for caliber.

If you like the Mosin, and you get the 1917 Enfield, I see a 12 step program in you future....

next, you will be buying (well used) Japanese 99's and 38's to remove the rusted out or otherwise not good barrel and chamber in a more popular caliber.

BTW, the Japanese action, a variation of the Mauser, is considered one of the strongest, stronger than the classic 98 action, by many experts.

The '17 has a reputation for being a very accurate MILSURP rifle. I own two - one was sporterized and it is very accurate. My milsurp 17 is only average - but I'm still playing around with it.

As others have said here, the 17 was a little more unwieldy than the '03. You need both of course to make your own judgement

My dad has a 1917 thats been sporterized, I really love that thing.

They are fine rifles, but they are over 10 lbs without ammo. You have to remember that they were the British Pattern 1914 (IIRC?) Enfield made under contract in the US for WW-I, and then converted to 06 and made for our troops. So it's really a hybrid design - part British and part US. They were designed for WW-I and bayonet charges and such. Had to be hell for strong.

Now days they are good for high power matches as the weight helps control recoil and some say the stock is a better fit ergonomically than the 03 or the 03A3? I like mine, but it is a bear in stock military form.

I have three that were severely bubba'd before I got them. They are all in stages of being tweaked. One will be left in 06, one will likely go to 270, and one will be a 'big un' I was thinking 375 H&H, but maybe a Weatherby magnum round or something? Still contemplating that one

They weren't converted
The US was making pattern 14 for the brits, needed more rifles and so put the P14 line into production making it in US 30.06, this isn't a .303 gun reamed out for 30.06, it's a gun that was made in BOTH .303 P14, and 30.06 M1917

Also the design has nothing to do with the British enfeilds, it's a Mauser action, basically it's the British Mauser, like the 1903 is the US Mauser (we paid them royalties all through WWI)

(we paid them royalties all through WWI)

Click to expand...

We paid the Brits or the Germans?

I have a P14, same as the 17 except it is 303. I enjoy shooting it every so often but would have not wanted to be in a combat situation with it. Ergonomically a very unwieldly thing. Nice and accurate however.

mauser sued the US government and won for patent violations

My dad took my grandfather's, that already had a sporter stock on it, we found a no-drill/no-tap mount for it, I just inherited it, and I will probably put a better trigger on it, and I will probably have the barrel looked at. I think it's entirely possible that my grandfather was less then religious in cleaning it, back in the day when you couldn't assume that ammo was non-corrosive. I might have it re-barreled.

Sorry, I mis-spoke - I meant the design was converted from the Pattern 1914 - not the rifle being converted from 303, as in rechambered after completion.

Yes they were purpose built in 06.

I love mine. It is so accurate that people probably think I'm full of bovine scatology when I say just how accurate it is. The thing is the bore condition is absolutley horrid. The magazine will hold 6 rounds because of the original design to accomodate the Brit 303 rimmed round. I think Remington still uses the same style of bolt handle on its current 700 (I haven't looked at one in nearly 20 years though)