Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by Nipty, Sep 29, 2022.
Thats a hard rifle to beat.
Great cartridge, excellent sights, feels good in the hands kinda rifle.
I have had several, all X Alaska Territorial Guard rifles that went home with the local Militia that filled out the ranks of the ATG when the Japanese invaded Alaska..
I think it is a "better" rifle over our home grown 1903. I think they are stronger, and I like the sights better.
As to your question, that area is pretty basic, give a try what @caribou suggested, been a while that I shot mine, made up some test loads many moons ago just never got to it....you are going to make me dig mine out.
For all the fat lot of good it will do, I add my appreciation for this rifle. The action, sights and trigger make it one of the better battle rifles of the era. Omitting the concept of loading and firing 20 rounds or so within a couple seconds, it may be on the top five for all time.
It is heavy though. Probably not so bad for shooting all afternoon, not so good for a 20 mile conditioning hike.
If you remove the two trigger guard screws you should be able to access the floor plate and adjust the seating of the magazine spring.
Post some pictures so we can have a better idea of how to help you. Pictures speak a thousand words.
You are not alone in that, Remington1911. From a military point of view it WAS superior in many ways. In addition to the better sights, the sighting radius is almost twice that of an 03 Springfield. This makes it easier to shoot accurately. Sighting errors are less serious the further away from one another the front and rear sights are.
The 1917s never had the blowup problems the 03s did. Yes, they were rare but there they were. The 1917 is more rugged. The front and rear sights were well protected against damage. The 03s sights were completely unprotected. It didn't take much of a blow to bend of break the front sight on an 03. Don't think front sight hoods were general issue during WWI . The 17 was simply a better military rifle.
You have a very interesting piece of history on your hands. If you ever get a chance to check out the book written by Frank de Hass called bolt action rifles. Better yet buy it!!! It can be had on eBay or Amazon. I also recommend that you acquire yourself a copy of the NRA guide to rifles and shotguns at the very least.
Rifles and Shotguns The Official NRA Guide to Firearms …
Bolt action rifles: Frank De Haas, John T Amber: …
I'm sure that others will chime in with their own opinions and other sources of information for you. Good luck I hope that you have resolved the issues you have had.
The M1917 is a full pound heavier and three inches longer.
I've still got an early (four digit serial #) Remington Pattern 14 that's in "as issued condition" except for removal of the volley sights and a little honest wear. It's never gone through the "Weedon Repair Standard" and still has the original bolt/lugs*.
It shoots well with jacketed handloads or HXP ball, but I've never been able to get better than minute of Stetson with any of the cast bullets I've tried.
I like shooting it at the range, but the knowledge that the action is strong enough to safely chamber a .577 Tyrannosaur isn't much consolation when you're trying to lug a super heavy .303 British through a swamp after pigs.
*Does anyone know why the Brits thought that they needed to beef up the P14 when it was already much stronger than the Lee Enfield No.I MkIII SMLE* or the No IV?
They were originally intended for the .276 Enfield cartridge, a high pressure, high velocity cartridge similar to the .270 Win. The pressures of wartime production cancelled the idea of a cartridge conversion so the P14 was produced in .303. A stroke of serendipity for the US, as we were short on service rifles entering WWI, but the P14 already in production was readily adapted to the .30-06 cartridge as it was already designed for a similar round.
Since the 1917 is a controlled-feed rifle, if the follower isnt lifting the rounds properly, the rim wont be captured behind the extractor as it should be before the bolt goes forward. Thus, the extractor will flex and snap over the rim as the bolt handle is cammed down. It is designed to do this in a pinch when a single round is placed in the chamber, though its probably not good for the extractor in the long run.
Which an 18-20 year old isn't going to notice, nor care about.
I had one and never could figure the love that some guys have for it. it felt as long as a civil war musket heavy awkward cocked on closing sluggish action. I sold it without shooting it. The 03 was lighter shorter cocked on opening and a lot more accurate. sights on the 03 were a problem but I saw 100's and never saw a front site bent maybe caused they were replaced I dont know
Separate names with a comma.