Eddystone M1917 Bolt Question

[lencac]

Hey Guys:
I have a question about the Eddystone m1917 I aquired a week ago. The rifle has virtually everything marked with an "E" obviously for Edddystone including on the underside of the bolt handle but on the topside of the handle just below the flaming bomb is a "C". Anybody know what that is?

 

[bcp]

Don't know, but someone here will.

http://www.jouster.com/cgi-bin/1917enfield/1917.pl?


Bruce

 

[Slamfire]

In the early nineties a bunch of M1917's were imported from Canada. The bolts and the stocks were serialized to the receiver, and the bolt and the stock had "C"'s stamped on them. There was a broad arrow stamped inside the C also.

US rifles did not have serial numbers on the bolt or stock.

These were probably sent to Canada as lend lease during WWII.

It is likely that is the origin of your "C" stamping.

 

[Oohrah]

I no longer own an Eddystone 1917 (Remington Factory), but have
a couple of Winchesters that only wear the flaming bomb on the bolt
handle. I also suspect a Canadian connection. The Win. and Rem.
I have seen have the single letter stamped on it, but not that location.

 

[lencac]

Ahhhhhh ! I'll buy that for a dollar. Thanks guys

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I bought an Eddystone last year and it turned out to have a Winchester barrel on it. I can't believe what good shape it's in and I'm glad I bought it. It was sported out before I bought it but I still couldn't resist buying a 30-06 for the price I paid.

 

[Slamfire]

Archangel: I have a sporterized Enfield in 270 Win. The work was done in the fifties, and I bought it off the original owner. He wanted the cheap route to a new rifle.

At the time those M1917's were worth about $15.00 when a Model 70 was $109.00. Of course the rifle he modified would be worth twice what it is now, if he had simply left it alone. But then he got to shoot what he wanted 50 years ago and that was the point.

Milling those rear sight protectors off is time consuming and expensive. But once done, you have an excellent action to use with a scope.

I would recommend you find a nice pistol grip aftermarket stock, something with a cheek piece, put on a recoil pad. As the M1917's are recognized as too valuable to convert to sporters, stocks will get harder to find. And you will like the ergonometrics of a decent stock. It will put your head in line with the scope and your finger in line with the trigger.

Also, if you have the original mainspring, replace it with a Wolf 18 pounder. http://www.gunsprings.com/RifleShotgun/Enfield_RsNF.html You will find the original mainspring is weak, and putting in a new one will crispen the trigger and quicken the lock time. Don’t go for an extended strength spring first off, as those make that action difficult to manipulate.

 

[lencac]

Here's what the rest of the firearm looks like. Traded a American made Walther PPKS and $50. It's in really nice condition. Shot it this weekend with some quick handloads I whipped up. Shot pretty well too. I'll load some good ammo for it to wring it out now that I know it shoots ok.

 

[lencac]

Hey Arch I also have a couple of M1917s, one a Remington and one an Eddystone that were "sporterized" These were "modified" as target rifles or so the person I got them from states. Some time in the 50s. I believe it too cause neither has any places where sling swivels were mounted and both are free floated barrels, one has a Timney comp trigger and the other is a highly reworked mil-spec trigger and both have been bedded. I think this type of mod like on mine and yours was a popular thing back in the day. I paid under $400 for both. They were a bit tarnished and some of the metal needed blueing but they both have perfect bores. So I did a little clean-up work on them. Loaded some ammo for them and tried em' out. They both shoot right on the button. I think I'll keep em' These M1917 things are very nice and extremely high quality pieces of work, don't you think Arch?

 

[ArchAngelCD]

All I know is, I'm not a great shooter but that rifle will do 2" (or a little more) groups for me at 100 yards. Yes, I think the 1917's are great rifles...

I wouldn't change the stock on it because I think the wood is beautiful. It's very old so it's very hard and there has been so much oil rubbed into it, it feels smooth as glass. I have mixed feeling about sporting a battle rifle but I do like this rifle a lot.

 

[lencac]

Arch I think your 1917 looks great, leave it like it is. What's done is done. I wouldn't sporterize a "virgin" still in mil-spec trim, like the other one I posted. But if it has been done already then what the heck. Besides in mil-spec trim these are kinda ugly duckings, not like a 1903 which I think is still sexy even in full military dress. But when someone takes the time to mill off the rear sight stuff and do the rest of it they can be pretty darn good lookin rifles.

 

[kragluver]

I own a sporterized 1917 and a recently purchased unmodified '17. The sporterized rifle was built back in the '50s for my uncle and then sold to my grandfather. It is a fine shooting rifle and will regularly hold MOA or better with handloads. Most of my deer have been taken with this rifle.

The MILSURP '17 is a recent purchase and is a work in progress. I haven't been able to acheive "great" accuracy with it yet, but I plan on shooting cast bullets in it and accuracy should improve.

Enjoy your '17s whether sporterized or not. They are fine rifles -- boy, what stories they might tell...

 

[mljdeckard]

My grandfather's 1917 made me look like a good shot, even with open sights when I was a kid. When my dad inherited it, he removed the sights and put a scope mount on it, but he kept the parts. (The stock had already been replaced. I REALLY hope that one trickles down to me one day, and I love it enough I might look for one anyway.

 

[lencac]

I'd love to see a couple of pics of both you guys stuff Kragluver if you like I got some tip on putting the stock and the action together to improve accuracy without using expoxy or glass to bed it. Let me know and I'll post it.