Back in the late 1980s and '90s there were at least of couple of import companies that brought back a sizable number of M1917 Enfields. The condition ranged from pretty good to just awful, but there were quite a few marked with a red and white painted bands that supposedly indicated they had been relegated to use as drill rifles. Some had plugged bores, some had drilled actions, but there were some that appeared to be pretty good... except for those red and white painted bands. Does anyone have any experience with these supposed drill rifles and actually cleaning one up and shooting it? Fellow has a couple of nice ones for sale and I was ready to hand over the money until he said that they had been painted with "red and white strips" but he just "cleaned them off." If this belongs in another catagory, I apologize. Thanks for your help.
Question about 1917 Enfield Drill Rifles?
- Thread starter drk1
- Start date
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
Probably failed a headspace or bore erosion test. Also check for bulged barrels, cracks in the receiver ring, and broken ejectors.
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
They never made a .22 variant if the M1917. You could always sleeve the barrel, but coming up with an ignition system might be tricky.
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
Now that I've had my coffee and my brain is in gear....
The British painted RED stripes on both '17s and 1903's to visually signify to the troops that they took non-standard .30-06 so a Home Guardsman didn't try to cram a .303 round into it.
But I believe the presence of a WHITE stripe does indicate Drill Purpose only. Gotta do some more research.
'Ang on a tick, Gov.
AlexanderA
Member
This thread will answer all your questions:
https://www.gunboards.com/threads/red-and-white-bands-on-1917-eddistone.413854/
https://www.gunboards.com/threads/red-and-white-bands-on-1917-eddistone.413854/
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
Interesting read, good stuff.
Best case, the sellers guns could just be perfectly good 1917s that were surplus to requirement, or simply wearing replacement P14 stocks- the presence of a volley sight plate would be a sure sign as '17s never had them.
Bottom line, though, they are well over 100 years old and should be thoroughly inspected by a competent gunsmith before shooting. All the stuff I mentioned in post #2 still apply regardless.
I did not intend to imply he could do a simple r&r merely that he could use it as a base for a conversion.
Did the UK have training rifles, similar to what other Nations did?
Kevin
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
Oh no. i gotcha. A pistol-caliber centerfire conversion or just a cartridge adapter is also doable. Shooters Box sells cartridge adapters for both .30-06 and .303 to .32ACP.
They sure did, made lots of .22 SMLE Enfields, mostly conversions but a few new build.
I've got one and it's great fun-
They are almost all single shots, and there is no ejection. Fired cases drop into the hollowed-out magazine. When it gets full, you pull it and dump it.
Not nearly as accurate as my M1922 though-
Last edited:
I'm not a collector, but have been told by those that are that the "Lend-Lease" stripes are desirable and might command a premium. Certainly something that shouldn't be removed as it tells a story about that rifles history.
Mosin77
Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2019
- Messages
- 1,589
If you do the research and discover that your markings are probably DP, and if there’s a good chance the stock is original to the gun etc, please have a smith gauge and inspect it before you take it to the range. This should be a lot more straightforward than with Enfields. Generally the Brits didn’t mess around with DP guns and they (and the sum of their parts) were supposed to be one step away from the scrap heap.
I’d sure shoot a 1917 before I took my chances on a mismatched DP Enfield, but 1917 actions have been known to crack too, so… one must be reasonably cautious with these old warhorses.
I’d sure shoot a 1917 before I took my chances on a mismatched DP Enfield, but 1917 actions have been known to crack too, so… one must be reasonably cautious with these old warhorses.
CapnMac
Member
UK painted 30-06 rifles with red and white bands to indicate that they were not 303.
Some of those rifles were later meant for Drill Purposes Only. Which usually meant they had failed some government arsenal test. The were meant to be demilled, too. But, that was not a universal process (IIRC). As in removing the firing pin and filling the FP passage with solder was occasionally considered "enough" (this as the "who" would be drilling was considered apt, military recruits could be presumed to be fully supervised).
UK did issue some training ammo in the European fashion, using wooden bullets, which were meant to splinter on firing. They also had Cadet/training rifles in 22LR, which culminated in the No 7.
Now, in US practice, "drill rifles" are meant to be to a specific standard. This is typically leaded bores and lead in the stock voids, to make the curst things heavy and build up muscle strength. That's a separate genre from "training" rifles which might only be DEWATed. Both want movable bolts, as you cannot execute Inspection Arms unless the bolt can be opened.
Some of those rifles were later meant for Drill Purposes Only. Which usually meant they had failed some government arsenal test. The were meant to be demilled, too. But, that was not a universal process (IIRC). As in removing the firing pin and filling the FP passage with solder was occasionally considered "enough" (this as the "who" would be drilling was considered apt, military recruits could be presumed to be fully supervised).
UK did issue some training ammo in the European fashion, using wooden bullets, which were meant to splinter on firing. They also had Cadet/training rifles in 22LR, which culminated in the No 7.
Now, in US practice, "drill rifles" are meant to be to a specific standard. This is typically leaded bores and lead in the stock voids, to make the curst things heavy and build up muscle strength. That's a separate genre from "training" rifles which might only be DEWATed. Both want movable bolts, as you cannot execute Inspection Arms unless the bolt can be opened.
AlexanderA
Member
I believe the "not .303" marking was a red band around the forestock near the muzzle. The red and white bands around the action were something else. These may have been an Indian thing.
CapnMac
Member
Ok, that's ringing a bell in my recollection. But, I'm not sure where in my book collection to go find the reference. Or, it's just too lazy a Sunday
Thanks folks. If I go forward with them, I'll certainly check the headspace, run a scope down the bore and fire it first from a rest. At this point, however, I'm really thinking that: 1) they're not really in "original condition" with the red & white bands removed, and 2) at my age I don't need any more rifles... hand guns weigh less and take up less room! Thanks again.
