M1903 or M917 - send me to school

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • echo6mike

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 1, 2013
    1,794
    Close to DC
    Short version, the next rifle I want to pick up is a bolt action .30-06 to go along with my Garand. But we've got two that were US service rifles, and lots to learn about both of them.

    So folks who know them, please educate this boot about the variants of the 1903, comparisons with the 1917, and why I might look for one over the other.

    I'll be looking for a shooter, with some collector value (but that's secondary), and beyond that I'm kinda stumped.

    I like the action on the later British Enfields, haven't handled the 1917 or many of the 1903s, but that's the extent of it. Never taken any of them to the range, and not sure what my budget will be (less than $1000, though).

    So please, edumacate me!

    s/f
     

    Major03

    Ultimate Member
    I'm not an expert, but as a fellow Marine if you're looking for a US Service Rifle collection that is more USMC focused I'd look for a 1903. I'm pretty sure more 1917 Enfields were actually issued during WWI to doughboys, but the devil dogs were toting the 1903 all the way through Guadalcanal.

    Shootable 1903A3 drill rifle conversions can be had for not too much money. That might be your best bet if you're looking for a shootable "collection" that is really not too historically accurate but a good representation. If you're going to go the full on collectors route, where the rifle has provenance...that's a different story all together.

    If you want to find a good representative piece for a USMC rifle, here's a good CMP article on what to look for.

    http://forums.thecmp.org/archive/index.php/t-2444.html
     

    Clif

    Member
    Dec 3, 2012
    56
    A terrific way to begin your quest is to go to the 2017 Antique Arms Show. March 18-19 at the State fair grounds in Timonium. There are plenty of folks selling and more than willing to educate you.
     

    K31

    "Part of that Ultra MAGA Crowd"
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 15, 2006
    35,632
    AA county
    M1917 is long. Long as in longer than 1903 which is already long. Finding a M1917 with a good bore may also be a challenge.
     

    iH8DemLibz

    When All Else Fails.
    Apr 1, 2013
    25,396
    Libtardistan
    I like my 1917 because it's more robust/heavier. Which helps with .30-06 recoil.

    Also a big fan of the front and rear sights. Gotta love a peep sight.

    Lastly, the stock has a different look to it. More British than American.
     

    chooks9

    Bear with Arms
    Jan 3, 2013
    1,155
    Abingdon
    I'm a M1917 nut for sure. Here's some background knowledge (please correct me if I'm wrong as I'm going from only memory right now).

    I have owned both (plus a Patter 14 rifle, the predecessor of the M1917). The M1917 is an excellent battle rifle, that in my opinion, is the best bolt action battle rifle ever created. It's strong, quick, and has excellent sights. It was originally created as a replacement for the the Lee Enfield by Vickers prior to WWI in .276 Enfield caliber (something like a more powerful 7x57), but the war meant that more Lee Enfields would be made instead and the Vickers design was adapted to .303 and the UK solicited contracts from US companies, namely Remington, Remington (Eddystone), and Winchester. All of these guns were dubbed the Pattern 1914 or P14 rifle and many hundreds of thousands were made during 1915-1916/17, mostly by Eddystone, with Remington and Winchester following up in descending order. However, each manufacturer make minor changes in parts that meant that parts interchangeability was a huge problem in that only some parts from a Winchester would fit a Winchester, etc. All were made from awesome steel from Midvale Steel (but more on that in the M1917 paragraph later). In all, very few of the rifles were ever used during WWI because too few made it to combat prior to war's end and the parts interchangeability problems mentioned before. Most of these rifles were used as sniper/marksman rifles (especially winchesters) and as rifles during the Dunkirk evacuation of WWII, but most found their way as Home Guard rifles during WWII or used by British Commonwealth nations or allies (Estonia, India, etc.). I personally love these rifles, especially my refurbised No.3 Mk. II home guard Winchester P14.

    As for the M1917, when the US entered WWI, we need rifles. Bad. The tooling for the Pattern 14 was already in place, changes to convert the rifle to .30-06 were made and contracts for all three rifles were placed. Again, Eddystone rifles were more common than Remington and Winchester. Millions were produced and it eventually became the most common rifle for "doughboys." After the war, the M1917 was not chosen to replace the M1903 for a number of reasons. During WWII, many M1917 rifles were refurbished and issued, especially to Navy units, Seabees, training units, the British as aid, and other allies. Some of these rifles are still in use by the Danish Sirius Patrol in Greenland.

    One word of caution: Be weary around any Eddystone produced rifle with a replacement barrel. They didn't properly heat treat their receivers, as in they didn't use pyrometers to gauge temperature in the heat treatment ovens. Plus, it's possible that barrels were overtorqued using a pneumatic wrench (possibly that was sourced from the locomotive building industry as Eddystone was co-located at the Baldwin Locomotive Works?). This meant that some receivers have had the carbon burned out of the steel plus overtorqued barrels that could cause cracking in the receiver if the torque is not let off properly (with a relief cut in the barrel). This means that in some cases, rebarreling processes caused cracks in the weakened steel that show at the joint between the barrel shank and receiver extension. I have one of these rifles that I have decommissioned, but I know my father shot it a lot before realizing that it was cracked. (maybe somebody upstairs likes me). BUT, not all Eddystone rifles are bad, just be careful.

    As for the Springfield 1903, they are incredibly historic and excellent shooters. I just don't have the same love for them as I do the M1917. Maybe I'm crazy.
     

    mawkie

    C&R Whisperer
    Sep 28, 2007
    4,337
    Catonsville
    Both models are collectible. I watched some very nice M1917s sell in mid December for $750-850 at a PA auction. They're very much on the rise these days. From my perspective if you want a WWII collectible then it's easy: 1903A3, Remington 1903 or pre-war Springfield 1903. The 03A3 has a nice receiver mounted sight and can easily be found in excellent condition. Prices are in the $750-850 range. Ditto for the Remington 1903. You would expect to pay a bit more for a nice pre-war Springfield 1903. These I like the best with their C stocks and better build quality.
    If you're more interested in WWI then it widens to add the M1917. The difficult and expensive thing for a purist is to find either a M1917 or WWI vintage 1903 that wasn't rebuilt for WWII. And if you want to shoot then you have to be wary of low SN 1903s and Eddystone M1917s with possibly brittle receivers. Not generally recommended to shoot (yes, you see these reworked for WWII but desperate people do desperate things in desperate times).
    I like the recommendation to spend a day at the upcoming Antique Arms show in March. Just leave your cash and check book at home, consider it a recon mission. Lots to see and learn about, I'd wait until you know what you want before diving in. Besides, if you're a bargain hunter, like moi, then it's almost Mission Impossible to get one at that show. But you'll see every flavor of 1903 and M1917 around and most in excellent condition.
     

    GodOfVice

    Banned
    BANNED!!!
    The obvious choice is buy both but whichever rears it pretty head first at a good price. Contrary to popular belief the great Sgt York carried a 1917 and not a 03 as shown in the flick.

    The 17 is heavier and more importantly stronger (not that the 03 is a weakling) I like my 03A3 sights far better than my 1937 vintage. If you were local Id sell it for 5 bills, exactly what I have into it.
     

    Doco Overboard

    Ultimate Member
    M1917's were never burned or overcarburized. They were in fact drawn back at each end of the reciever and this can often be seen in the finish when viewing one that has not been sandblasted during a rebuild. You can see it best on the port side exterior along the bolt lug raceway. Looks like a lead dipped heel on m1
     

    echo6mike

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 1, 2013
    1,794
    Close to DC
    Between here and the CMP forums, I'm getting great info already. Knew I would. One thing about keeping with USMC pieces would point me at the 1903 (or 03A3), so I need to read up on the differences there. Actually I think that did just make up my mind. Now to go learn about all the fine points of 1903/1903A3 selection.

    Probably an A3 for the sights, but I should go find a few of each to fondle.

    GoV, where's "local", if you don't mind the opsec breach?



    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
     

    GodOfVice

    Banned
    BANNED!!!
    Between here and the CMP forums, I'm getting great info already. Knew I would. One thing about keeping with USMC pieces would point me at the 1903 (or 03A3), so I need to read up on the differences there. Actually I think that did just make up my mind. Now to go learn about all the fine points of 1903/1903A3 selection.

    Probably an A3 for the sights, but I should go find a few of each to fondle.

    GoV, where's "local", if you don't mind the opsec breach?



    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

    Lewisberry/Etters Pa area, make a left a bit south of Harrisburg on 83 and you're here! :)
     

    Threeband

    The M1 Does My Talking
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 30, 2006
    25,232
    Carroll County
    The 17 is actually a Mauser varient. It has no relation to any Lee rifle.

    Some people say the 17 is a big fat clumsy ox.
     

    Doco Overboard

    Ultimate Member
    All m1917's are made from nickle steel and period film shows barrels being clocked by hand by assembly workers with a device similar to the one used to assemble m1's. Most of the cracks are reported to have occurred by poor tooling or methods outside the factory and yes they can be a bear to break loose. 17's are big and clumsy but have tremendous lockup due to progressive bolt reciever helix mating surfaces and cam forward when the bolt handle is turned all the way down which can swage the chamber with a hs guage to the uninformed. They can also be made to safety off if the bolt handle and safety are manipulated incorrectly or in a non standard way which was surprisingly not caught during the 276 design trials. They were however built with a protected fsb that the 03 didnt have which can easily be damaged in the field. 17's are rugged and nice rifles but dont quite have the golden means of proportion than the 03. I have a 5 digit win that will parts swap with every other one of the 17's I own and I could never find out what exactly will not work with others.
     

    jessebogan

    Active Member
    Feb 25, 2012
    503
    I have one of each A 1917, with a November 1918 barrel date Never rebuilt, and shoots like a champion. I have an 03A3 that came from CMP years ago. It is a post WW2 rebuild, but has a beautiful stock. Also shoots well. But if I had to choose...I would keep the 1917.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,922
    Messages
    7,259,125
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom