Us m1917 enfield @ help

[APPLETREE]

Can anyone tell me if Winchester, Eddystone or Remington traded parts back in the early days of production- - Say 1917, 1918???
Thanks to all !!!

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Patrick Chadwick]

the early days of production- - Say 1917, 1918???

Production was almost all in 1917-1918, fading out early in 1919.

The M1917 was designed and produced so that most parts were interchangeable between manufacturers. The evidence from existing rifles with an apparently unchanged original configuration is that the manufacturers did indeed supply parts to each other. See "United States Rifle Model of 1917" by C.S. Ferris, who also cites original documentation referring to production, and "The Pattern 1914 and U.S. Model 1917 Rifles" by Charles R. Stratton.

1) Interchangeability was a declared manufacturing aim.
2) Interchange between manufacturers was also practised.
3) The aim of manufacturers was to produce rifles as fast as possible, not all-matching collector items.
4) Any collector's claim that a rifle must be "incorrect" or "not original" if not every single tiny part is from the same manufacturer is, therefore, nonsensical.
5) The converse is also true. All-matching does not prove that the rifle is original in the sense of "as it left the factory".The "all-matching" mania has probably led to many rifles that originally left the factories in a functionally correct but not all-matching configuration being falsified by the replacement of perfectly good parts just to achieve the all-matching condition. These rifles are, strictly speaking, no longer original.

6) But since no-one can tell if a barrel band, for instance, was put on the rifle at the factory 95 years ago, or by someone else yesterday, who cares? And if it makes you happy...

7) Get the books!

[emmagee1917]

For almost 100 years the answer has been a resounding NO .
Has new records listing shipments between the plants come to light ?
What parts , what quanities and what dates ?
Chris

[APPLETREE]

So Patrick said Yes, but Emmagee is saying NO?? Wow thats not making things easy. I understand they did with M1 carbines. Oh and I do have the North Cape book "For collectors only" not much help with the question of swapping parts.

[Patrick Chadwick]

Not every part was viewed as interchangeable. C.S. Ferris has a list on PP. 10-11 of the parts that were deemed interchangeable. But the list does not include the pressure-bearing parts, i.e. barrel, receiver and bolt. If these are not from the same manufacturer, you are likely to be looking at a "bitsa" (bits of this and bits of that) rifle.

And although the interchangeability was established, after a lot of trouble (described in detail by Ferris) - particularly with Winchester - this does not prove that it was actually practised in the factories. In this respect Emmagee may well be right, but are there any remaining records at all of parts sourcing, for instance from outside suppliers?

After WW1, about 200,000 M1917s (see Ferris P.140) were reconditioned by Rock Island Arsenal. The use of replacement barrels from subcontractors is mentioned, and I would also imagine that in achieving 1250 reconditioned rifles a day, the fitters will have taken advantage of the interchangeability of most parts. Likewise for field repairs by armorers.

Not surprisingly, after 95 years and with imperfect documentation, it all reduces to "more likely" and "less likely", and one should be cautious with "always" or "never" statements.

[APPLETREE]

Well, I'd like to thank both of you for your interest and aid in this problem.

[Chuckindenver]

no., the one thing they all shared was the maker of the steel for the receiver, Midvale steel.
as well as the blanks for early barrels.
heres why.
the U.S. military wanted a warranty to some sorts..so...all manufactures marked parts with E R or W..knowing that the rifles would be taken apart by the end user, and likely parts would get swapped.
so..if someone elses parts were installed, that pretty much voids any type of guarantee or warranty.

[RC20]

I don't think the parts interchange had anything to do at the factory production level.

It did have to do with the fact that as soon as they went into the filed things would break and then you did not want to be limited and thats where the possible issue would occur.

The only absolutely complete guns would be a factory new and then side tracked and never saw field service or if it did, got side tracked and put in a corner someplace and only came out in recent history.

That said, all the ones I have bought have had some mix of parts other than the barrel and receiver (and one of those has an IA barrel). All of the parts work fine.

My Red Band 1917 not only has the wrong bolt mfg but also the wrong serial number on it (does not match the guns) and works fine including head space

It would seem that its not an issue or mostly not an issue.

[APPLETREE]

Thanks again folks this is great, but let me explain the reason behind the question: I have been watching a Winchester that looked real nice, and at the time photos showed it had a Remington barrel which confused me. The gun finish appeared to be blued (Original?) but couldn't figure out why a Rem. barrel. So if they didn't swap parts and during arsenal rework I'm sure they wouldn't have used a win. barrel then I guess some owner thought it would be a good idea.
I was just looking for a very nice 17 to add to a small collection of military seldom if ever shot rifles. Oh well I'll keep looking, and thanks again. ....One other thing later the ad was updated to show that many parts on the gun are non-Winchester - It looked good.... So if anyone bumps into a extra nice 17 send me a note, I'll be in your debt.
Ralph

[RC20]

Not to be nasty or anything but it does help if you state the basis for the question.

In your case all would have said absolutely not (receiver and barrel different mfg).

The exception to that would be JA and HS barrels from WWII. The JA would be 2 grove with no date and the HS barrels are also WWII.

Both were made so 1917s could be reconditioned.

Add that to an amazing chapter that they were still redoing them in a major way.

The JA barrel I have shoots a wider range of bullets including the HXP better than the original barrel I have (most are in very good condition).

And I am dealing with a receiver barrel mix that I hope will be ok but needs a bit of cleaning up and chamber work. Minor issue but anoying