Conundrum: 1903A3 or 1917?

[vanfunk]

Hello Ladies and Gents,
Allow me to present, for your reading pleasure, the latest "fork in the road" to which I have presented myself. Spurred on by last week's astonishingly good deal on an all-matching k98k, I have now squared myself to the inevitable purchase of one of the following U.S. service rifles:

1) a papered CMP Remington 1903A3 in arsenal-renewed condition (pretty fresh park) with matching bolt (e-p'd on bolt flat) and pristine 3-43 barrel and nice, straight stock. Or...

2) a Model of 1917, as manf'd by Winchester in 1918, with correct "W" 2-18 barrel, in original polished blue. "W" marked bolt (looks original) and scattered "E" marked small parts. Stock is excellent and shows only a few kisses from the bolts of neighboring rifles in storage.

Both rifles are the same price and within my buying/trading range.

Now, the 03A3 would be more appropriate, given the WWII kick I seem to be on again, but the 1917 is in really nice shape and I have no WWI guns in my collection. Also, my Winchester Garand (WIN-13) could use a little company from an older cousin. The 03A3 has better sights for shootin', per my reckoning, but the '17's sight picture is very good albeit less adjustable.

So, dear reader, what would you do?

I plan to one of these tomorrow, unless I lose my mind and buy the Arsenal SA-M7s they just got in. Speaking of which, is that a good AK? Been thinkin' about upgrading from my "plebeian" SAR-1...

Thanks!!!!
vanfunk

 

[Publicola]

I'm biased. I'd go for the '17. Great action, good sights & overall one of the best bolt action battle rifles ever made.

But like I said I'm biased: I've owned two sporterized '17's & each one of them would give me reliable function as well as decent groups (1.25 MOA). BTW the sporterizing done to each consisted of cutting the original barrel down to about 22", grinding off the ears to mount a scope, & adding a new stock. So minus the rear sight ears, stock & a few inches of barrel my experience has been with the original parts (just slightly modified).

But if you'd really prefer the 03A3 I won't try to talk you out of it - that just means there's 1 more '17 out there for me.

 

[Drue]

Tough queestion. I agree that the 03A3 sights are a little better but the 1917s are not bad. Just ask Sgt York. A WWI kick is not a bad place to be but the 1917 was used in both World Wars. A bunch were given to the Chinese and the Brits got some through Lend Lease. Neither was is front line service with US forces except for the 03A4 sniper version of the Springfield.

I dunno. Since the CMP still has 03A3s for sale, I would probably go for the Enfield since these are becomming harder to find in decent shape.

IMHO the SAM7 is one of the best AKs available to US shooters but since it is an AK and you already have the SAR, I would choose between the Springfield and the Enfield.

My $0.02

Drue

 

[mbott]

I'm biased. I'd go for the '17.

Agreed. They are so ugly they have to shoot well.

Actually, what I really like about the M1917 is the weight. They don't punish the shooter who's spending a long afternoon at the range as much as the M1903A3. I also like the front sight much better on the '17 over the '03A3.

--
Mike

 

[vanfunk]

Good Points All!
Thanks for your replies so far. I'm kinda leaning toward the '17 at the moment. I know it may seem odd to many, but I prefer the looks of the '17 to the '03A3 (though I prefer the lines of the original '03 to either). The sight wings of the '17 sorta remind me of a '50-something Chevy.

And, I've always preferred Winchester to Remington...:>)

I just wish I could banish all thought given to that Arsenal SA-M7, but I can't! Ugh, it burns, it burns!!!

vanfunk

 

[Jim K]

I would go with the Model 1917; there seem to be fewer around in near original condition. The value should go up faster than that of the '03A3.

Jim

 

[Gator]

I agree, the 1917 has its original barrel and finish and it's a Winchester! The small Eddystone parts would not be that hard to replace. This would be a no-brainer for me.

Don't forget that the CMP 03A3s with the electro-pencil on the bolts were most likely from the batch recently returned from Greece. There were some nice ones in that lot, and the one you are looking at sounds pretty good, but the CMP is still selling them for $400. A Winchester 1917 with the original/barrel finish is worth more.

 

[Hutch]

Agree with all the above who suggest the 1917. You can still get 03A3's via CMP, so go wif' big ugly. Do you mind revealing how much either of these treasures will set you back?

 

[Badger Arms]

Wow, seems that I agree too. You better not let that Enfield go. We need nudie shots of the gun when you get it, though.

 

[vanfunk]

Thanks guys! I'm going to pop by the store tonight after work. If the '17 is in as good a condition as I remember it being, I'll buy it . Both of the rifles are listed at $675, but the owner always prices high. He'll let me have either one for $550.

Sadly, I have no digital camera. You'll just have to rely on your imagination!

Two technical questions:
How available are "W" marked '17 parts? I recall that the safety on the piece is definitely an Eddystone, and if I get the rifle I'll want to replace it.

I am aware of a fully-adjustable rear peep sight having been made (Parker Hale #5 or something?) for the P-14 Enfield. These are supposed to be drop-in replacements for the '17. Anyone know anything about these, or where I could get one?

Thanks!

Only one hour to go before leaving work.....

vanfunk

 

[vanfunk]

Alas...

It is not to be. Turns out that the Winchester 1917 is a mixmaster. The receiver and barrel are an original pairing, but every other part (including the bolt) is Eddystone. For $550 I think it's too much. I'll wait for the price to come down (if ever) to the 450'ish range and then I'll pick it up.

Thanks to all for your help!
vanfunk