Winchester M1917 From CMP South Store

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!
  • MilsurpDan

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 1, 2012
    2,217
    Frederick County
    I don’t know what archives show, but my
    great uncle, Co A, 305th Inf, 77th Inf Div,
    carried one.

    The 305th regimental history cites
    that the regiment loved their Winchester’s,
    which were issued in the late fall of ‘17 at Camp Upton. It notes they then initially
    trained on SMLEs when they first arrived in France and were trained by Brits in a quiet sector, before moving up into more active areas.
    They were then reissued their “Winnies” for
    the transition to more active service, and
    carried them into combat and through the
    rest of their service. If I recall correctly,
    they deployed from the US to France in
    April of ‘18.
    Not sure whether the rest of the 77th Div
    (to include the various units that comprised
    “The Lost Battalion”) carried Winchester’s,
    but the ‘17, made by whatever
    manufacturer, was their standard.

    Lots of interesting primary documents in this thread on Gunboards about the discrimination against Winchester M1917’s due to interchangeability issues.

    https://forums.gunboards.com/showth...ikelyhood-your-M1903-and-M1917-went-to-France

    Basically pretty much no Pre-January 1st 1918 Winchester’s saw service in Europe, only Stateside. The Post-January 1st, 1918 Winchester’s weren’t approved until June 1918.
     

    Cruacious

    C&R Farmer
    Apr 29, 2015
    1,595
    Elkton
    I have owned both an 03A3 and still own an M1917. I sold the 03A3, kept the M17. I felt the recoil impulse felt a helluva lot better on the M17, and, from my personal experience, the M17 outshot the 03A3 by far. I can drop a 5 round pattern on my M17 within the 10 ring or bullseye every time I take it out once I get myself comfortable. With the 03A3 I was 9 ring or better. Both rifles were in excellent condition overall. It might be that I am a poorer shot with the 03A3 because of the feel (I also shoot left-handed exclusively with rifles) but I stick with what works. The M1917 is by far my preference of rifle from WW1 and the most accurate C&R rifle I own at present.
     

    TheOriginalMexicanBob

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 2, 2017
    32,151
    Sun City West, AZ
    I have owned both an 03A3 and still own an M1917. I sold the 03A3, kept the M17. I felt the recoil impulse felt a helluva lot better on the M17, and, from my personal experience, the M17 outshot the 03A3 by far. I can drop a 5 round pattern on my M17 within the 10 ring or bullseye every time I take it out once I get myself comfortable. With the 03A3 I was 9 ring or better. Both rifles were in excellent condition overall. It might be that I am a poorer shot with the 03A3 because of the feel (I also shoot left-handed exclusively with rifles) but I stick with what works. The M1917 is by far my preference of rifle from WW1 and the most accurate C&R rifle I own at present.

    I'm not about to dispute your experience...what works for you is what counts. If the '03A3 you owned had the straight service stock it does make it comparatively more difficult to shoot against an '03A3 with the full-pistol grip C-stock. The C'stock transforms the rifle into a much better and more controllable shooter. To me it just shows how stock design matters in such things.
     

    Doco Overboard

    Ultimate Member
    Kenyon states in those documents the believed problem with parts interchangeability kept the early Win 17's back. Supposedly Win jumped production and manufactured somewhere up to 10 k rifles before contract language was sorted out. (wanted paid for them early) There were also inspection difficulties with British personnel in the factory who were politically motivated and complained non stop about the factory, methods, tooling, gauging etc.
    Fast forward to today. Steve N. has recently either uncovered or brought to light other documents that indicate problems with receiver ring cracking pertaining to all models of M17 rifles. A lot of folks disagreed and were not happy with any conclusions drawn from the discussion.
    My take is the British, really were not happy with the square threads used during the manufacture of the barrel component.
    LE rifles use V type threads and the method of fitting is substantially easier when doing an R&R on a rifle with a failed barrel component such as bent, rusted, seamy etc.
    During manufacture, square threads when fitted to a nickle steel receiver designed to stretch,(post 1903 billet HTissues) still crack the receiver ring. A quick trip over to machinery handbook will provide the technical data to prove this true.
    I think the Brit inspectors, not familiar or just in dis-approval with the method of attachment to begin with just didn't agree and complained the major part of interchangeability was in fact the tendency to produce a crack when fitting is done without care or a suitable way to gauge the barrel threads prior to installation to the receiver. They had to learn how to adapt, in machine works the fitting method that was not familiar to them.
    Different suppliers such as JA may have produced barrels in an elevated frequency and more likely used the same or old machinery just with a slightly difference tolerance that created a condition susceptible to the possibility of a crack developing. Whether it be at initial installation or after being subjected to proof or firing a particular number of rounds these rifles of all makes have been found with cracks regardless to who made the receiver.

    Theirs a reason M17's are notorious to break free the barrel during removal. its not because they were screwed in tight. It's because the threads in either the receiver or the barrel stub do not have in all cases the correct amount of relief to be completely reliable for measurement in all cases.When the rifle is fired the pressure radiates outwards at a certain moment of gas expansion-brass case retraction.

    Krags have the same method of attachment. I never seen or heard of a ring failure due to cracking with lessor metallurgy in the steel making. Same thing with the Garand,( a Krag and G barrel have the same type and diameter of barrel stub threads. A Garand barrel will screw right into a Krag action nearly with the same amount of barrel index to TDC) They were both made initially at SA only and completely understood with a emphasis on creating a new product that had to be flawless in manufacture because it was a new concept developed for the government in each case.

    Heres an Early W marked rifle from my collection that never made it to France. Note the star on the left bolt lug guide way exterior. All parts will interchange with any other US marked rifle.

    * (Side Note) Not all parts from a M17 will interchange with a P-14.
    There as light differences in the stock precluding a 17 mag well from dropping in, barrel channel different, ejector, FP, extractor, bolt face bottom metal exterior dimension to wood in letting, rear sight graduations to name a few.
    Maybe this is what the Brits really wanted, complete interchangeability with existing P-14 models and then avoiding subsequent eventuality of emergency use only later on with eventual obsolescence.

    IMG_1806.jpg

    IMG_1805.jpg
     

    Doco Overboard

    Ultimate Member
    I'm not about to dispute your experience...what works for you is what counts. If the '03A3 you owned had the straight service stock it does make it comparatively more difficult to shoot against an '03A3 with the full-pistol grip C-stock. The C'stock transforms the rifle into a much better and more controllable shooter. To me it just shows how stock design matters in such things.

    Stock type is shooter preference. When shooting my rifles, I prefer the Scant stock just because of the different comb height and reduced grip surface from prone.
    Standing for me is where the C grip is better.

    Each stock type is also different between all marks dependent on rear sight position 03-and then A3 with different sight radius.
     

    Cruacious

    C&R Farmer
    Apr 29, 2015
    1,595
    Elkton
    I'm not about to dispute your experience...what works for you is what counts. If the '03A3 you owned had the straight service stock it does make it comparatively more difficult to shoot against an '03A3 with the full-pistol grip C-stock. The C'stock transforms the rifle into a much better and more controllable shooter. To me it just shows how stock design matters in such things.

    My rifle had the S style stock, and I hated it. I won't doubt that a C style stock would have made the experience far better for me. Still, I love my M1917's performance and stick by it.
     

    TheOriginalMexicanBob

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 2, 2017
    32,151
    Sun City West, AZ
    With the C-stock the '03A3 is a superior bolt gun...the '03...even with a C-stock still suffers due to the sights being so far forward of your eyes. The thin front sight blade of the '03 and '03A3 is handicap as well compared to the larger and more substantial '17 sights. I've owned both and find the '03 or '03A3 with a C-stock simply handles and balances better for me.
     

    Ngrovcam

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 20, 2016
    2,852
    Florida
    I'm not about to dispute your experience...what works for you is what counts. If the '03A3 you owned had the straight service stock it does make it comparatively more difficult to shoot against an '03A3 with the full-pistol grip C-stock. The C'stock transforms the rifle into a much better and more controllable shooter. To me it just shows how stock design matters in such things.

    SDM!!!!
    (Stock Design Matters)
     

    Darkemp

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 18, 2009
    7,808
    Marylandistan
    They’re hefty bolt actions even for surplus guns. Shouldn’t have sold my Winchester- got it here on the site as a bubba (no metal work was changed) and restored it to military condition with carefully sourced parts and ultimately sold it here about 5 years ago. Now I’d pay twice what I sold it for to get it back.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,919
    Messages
    7,258,789
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom