Newbie Here with M1917 Sporter Question

This past July I bought a Winchester M1917 off GunBroker that had been sporterized. I searched around on the internet looking for data on these and read somewhere that a company sporterized a bunch of these in the 1960's? Is this true? Or were all the sportered M1917's done on an individual basis?

Any gurus out there that can fill me in on the "sporter" history of these guns?

Mine came with what appeared to be a Redfield rear sight. I removed the sight and had a local gunsmith install a weaver rail on it and mount a scope for me. He mounted it in such a fashion that if I want to I can remove it and go back to the Redfield sight.

http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/e...CP/My30-06.jpg

What is a 1917?
There was a cottage industry sporterizing these. A square built their "Hannibal" rifles on the Enfield. I don't know if their source was 1971 or P-14. The action is so large and strong, it was used for 505 Gibbs on down. Don't know about any specific company from the 60's. Most serious(some??) straightened the bolt handele. For one thing, the stock is easier to cut and it looks more like a sporter with the straightened bolt handle. The floor plate on yours was straightened. The sling swivels date the piece back to the 60's. Good looking rifle.
Bill

I have heard the term "Straightened Floor Plate". I assume it has something to do with the bottom of the magazine well? What does this involve and why was it done?

Thanks.

At the top of tjhis page is a P-13 with the orig. floorplate. It is buttt ugly. They are sliced in two and welded back together. The seam should be visible. It sure is when I weld one. There have been newly manufactured "flat" floorplate that don't have a reweld. Maybe on your next one you will have more to look at.

Didn't someone mention a few weeks ago, something about Golden State Arms or Santa Fe. They were a company in the 50s or 60s that sporterized these?

My M1917 doesn't have any markings on it that state who or what company did the sporter conversion.

If its not marked, then it was done by an individual rather than a company, most likely. Sporter stocks were sold by Bishop and Fajens amongst others. Weld on bolt handles were (and are) available to replace the original dog-leg handle if the builder did not wish to reforge the existing shape. Same for triggers, scope mounts, iron sights, etc. Examples range from absolute hammered dog poo to master craftman in quality. Some gunsmiths did offer a basic package, but they usually have some ID if they were prolific builders.
If it shoots well don't worry about it, there's probably no way to tell who built it!

your rifle looks like many of the sporterized 17,s i see at shows.
they were sold cheaply back in the 1950,s and 60,s.
your stock looks to be a Bishop, and may say so on the buttplate.
the trigger guard has been straightened, and likely had the mag box modified as well, both usually had to be done when strighten the trigger guard.
bolt though polished is GI. most 17,s will clear a scope without messing with the bolt.
sometimes the builder of said rifle will stamp his or her name on the underside of the barrel.
likely done by someone who wanted to build his own hunting rifle, prolly been through the woods for years, and shoots very well.
a good strong, safe action, made from 3.5 & nickle steel.
i would have a REAL gunsmith check the headspace and safety check the rifle before you take it out and shoot it..
my only recommendation?? dump the cheap scope, and base, buy a steel base made by Redfield for the Remington M30 or 17-14..and spend as much on a scope as you did the rifle.
this year, i had some 15 rifles come over my bench with accuracy issues.
all. but one, had scope, rings, and or base issues.
iv seen many 900.00 rifles with a 75.00 scope, 10.00 rings and bases that wouldnt stay on the paper.
and many 150.00 sporters with a 200.00 scope, 30.00 rings, 30.00 base. shoot in a dime.
a lighted reticle is only a sales tool, and a waist of money, when its cold, usually the battery dies, and they wont work anyway. and most wont take recoil of more then a .223. are your eyes really that bad??
Burris, USA Redield, Leupold, USA Weaver are great scopes.
Nikon, Pentax, BSA are fair scopes.
Bushnell. Tasco, Simmons, Nc-star, and so on are poo poo, and a waist of money for a hunting rifle.
also, any scope priced over 1000.00 on a 250.00 hunting rifle is a waist of money, or Gods way of telling you, you have too much money...lol.
my take on the cheaper import glass,
made in Japan???usually wont handle heavy recoil, rifles over 30-06 but have great glass, and finish.
made in China...will handle heavier recoil, but less then standard glass, and finish.
Made in Russia.. tough, will handle about any recoil, not pretty, easy to use, and real basic, usually adjust in metric, on yards, and inches.
made in USA.. Awesome, usually handle any recoil, fit and finish first rate, great glass.
Made in Germany, ect...handle heavy recoil, great glass, confusing adjustments, {metric usually} finish is fair for what they are, and over priced, usually per the name on the box.

Sheperd scopes...wow, awesome scope, tough, good finish,,however, hard to use if you have never used one, once you learn how to use a Sheperd scope, chances are you have one on all your hunting rifles.
but youll pay for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuckindenver

your stock looks to be a Bishop...

my only recommendation?? dump the cheap scope, and base, buy a steel base made by Redfield for the Remington M30 or 17-14..and spend as much on a scope as you did the rifle...

are your eyes really that bad??

---

It is a Bishop stock.

I did indeed have my Gunsmith check the head spacing. He said it was fine.

I agree with you on the scope. I put the Bushnell scope on there for now while I save for a Leupold Vx3. The scope mount was just installed by my gunsmith and I am pretty confident that it will work fine. A Redfield mount wouldn't work because the profile of the rear of the receiver on this particular rifle is not the same as an M30. Whoever ground off the rear sight did so in such a fashion that the rear of the receiver has a slope to it that is a different angle than the M30. My Gunsmith drilled six holes in the rail, three are tapped and have leveling screws in them and the other three are the mounting screws. He was able to get the rail mounted perfectly in line with the rifle bore. Then he filled in the gap between the rail and the receiver with "Steel-Bed". After the steel-bed cured he removed the rail, machined off the excess steel-bed and reinstalled the rail. Then he used a culminator to set/check the scope. Sorry, this pic is the best I can do right now of the scope mount my Gunsmith installed. https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...11/3006d-1.jpg

There are no markings on the rifle anywhere that indicate who sportered the gun. So I must assume it was done in home.

Lastly and regretfully... Yes my eyes are that bad, thank God they still work though. :)

Thanks for your input/advice.

all that really matters is that your are happy..
your rifle will likely give years of great service,,not bad for a rifle almost a 100 years old.

Well it looks like I will most definitely be upgrading the scope rings as you suggested. The rail must not be on the receiver parallel to the bore. I tried to sight it in today. I got the windage set within a few clicks but ended up adjusting the elevation all the way down till it stopped and was still 8-10 inches off the top of the bulls-eye. :thdown:

The rings on there now are the Millet brand and are adjustable for windage. I don't need that as much as the elevation. So I was looking at a set of the Burris Model 420520 Signature Zee 1 inch Riflescope Weaver Style Based Rings. I guess I have to buy the eccentric kit separately?

Do you have any suggestions regarding these rings or another type?

What did it have for a scope mount before the work was done to the bridge?
Could you take a picture at a higher angle to see the new work?

Often the bridge work was done to match the profile of the mod. 70 or 700.
Your rifle is a puzzle.

id have to have your fifle in my hands to see, if it were me..
i would have welded rather then used an epoxy, though epoxy has come along way.
and used a Redfield base, i would have tried a few types, from the Jap, M70 to 700 Remington, and used one that would have worked with some modifiactions.
they may still make a Zee ring with windage adjustment, youll have to look.

The trigger guard has a dogleg just behind the front screw, many builders worked the dogleg out so the guard goes straight across and look more like a commercial rifle.

Dan

Well its been a looooooooooong time but I finally got this rife sighted in. I can get a 3 inch shot group at 100 yards with the cheap scope and my inadequate shooting skills. I believe that a pro would do much better for sure lol!!

I ended up using a set of Burris scope rings with the offset inserts to get the scope mounted properly.

Now to practice with it and then eventually save for the better scope. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by my05hammer

I have heard the term "Straightened Floor Plate". I assume it has something to do with the bottom of the magazine well? What does this involve and why was it done?

Thanks.

---

This 1917 has a straightened floor plate. It removes the guppy-like belly of the military version and gives it smoother lines.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...580b97_z-1.jpg

CX

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Xray

This 1917 has a straightened floor plate. It removes the guppy-like belly of the military version and gives it smoother lines.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...580b97_z-1.jpg

CX

---

I see now what you mean.

That is one nice rifle too.

Thanks. It is my favorite deer rifle. Hunted with it in Alaska for caribou and several southern states for whitetail.

CX