M-1917

[Quilly]

anyone use one or own one of these fine rifles? i have heard good things about them over the 1903's i have shouldered the 1903 and find the stock short and hate that mauser rear sight.

i am thinking of ordering one from mil-tec since it will be done over with a custom barrel and guaranteed1.5" at 100yds.

i would like to here your info on this gun. pro's and con's?

[Charley]

The US M1917 (sometimes improperly called the P-17 or Pattern 17) was an adaptation of the British P-14 Mauser type rifle that the Brits WOULD have adopted had WWI not broken out as the change over was begining. The US was producing P-14s for the Brits, at Winchester, Remington, and the Remington run plant at Eddystone. When the US became involved in the war, it was a relativly simple task to convert the production lines from the P-14 in .303 to the M-1917 in .30/06.
The M1917 is either loved or hated, not many are neutral.
Good points:
Excellent sights, better than any other rifle of the time period.
Very positive safety, which falls naturally under the right thumb.
Bad points:
Heavy son of a gun! Moreso than an M-1903, NoI mkIII Enfield, and 1898 Mauser.
Cock on closing action.

I like the M1917, and cock on close actions don't bother me.

BTW, Remington's Model 30 rifle, produced from the 1920s to the 1940s, was essentialy a M1917 that was sporterized at the factory!

[James B]

I have two. One in 30-06 and the other in 303 as refered to above. Both guns shoot very well and I like them a lot. They are a little heavy but work good on stand.

[pharaoh2]

These were very well made rifles, and modern companies would do good to build similar quality guns today!

[Briman]

Good battle sights, probably one of the first military rifles to use an aperture at the receiver. If you want good target sights, the 1903 (not 1903A3) has it beat hands down.

Heavier than the '03 alot less perceivable recoil than the '03.

Solid battle proven enfield action.