Should I buy Eddystone 1917

I'm a casual collector of milsurplus having half a dozen rifles from various nationalities but am basically a novice at it. For the most part, I've sought inexpensive pieces that are in good functional shape and just need a bit of TLC to clean them up etc.

I've been making some calls to various gun shops in the area to see what they have and found a shop that has a pair of Carcanos that I decided to check out.

Beside the Carcano was an Eddystone 1917 that at first I ignored but decided to take a gander at the price, $299.00. That got my attention but as I don't know a tremendous amount about them I went home and researched them quite a bit last evening.

The receiver was made in September of 1918. It has been rebarreled with a Johnson barrel with no date stamp. The stock is what I believe to be a Remington as it is stamped with an "R" on the tip of the stock. That is the only stock marking I can find and I looked it over pretty well. Only problem is that whoever had it before loaded the stock with some sort of reddish shellac that could very well hide any faint markings.

The bolt is a mix of a Remington body with some Eddystone parts. The safety works, the trigger has a nice even pull. The bolt however is stiff to pull back once the trigger has been fired. There are a few flat spots worn onto it that seem odd to me and the side portion which slides through the groove and can be seen looking at it's right side is scored pretty heavily.

The overall finish of the metal doesn't look too bad. It's there, very dull parkerized blue look. The ordnance bomb on the left side of the receiver is only 2/3's there.

The bore doesn't look that great but the rifleing is there and it's hard to tell if it's just overly dirty or just dull. They ran a wire brush and a patch through it a few times after I asked about it and the bore has a bit of shine to it but looks scratchy and the two counter guys said they "think" they can see some minor pitting toward the center of the barrel. My eyes didn't really know what to look for.

Having priced these last night, I believe $300 is a bit on the cheap side for one of these even in poor condition but I would prefer a rifle that I can shoot and do so safely. They cannot gage the bore. Their opinion is that it is functional but they admitted they really know very little about it.

Being that it is a late 1918 rifle, the receiver hardness or brittleness shouldn't be an issue from what I've read but again, not sure. That it is a military rebarrel would also seem to indicate that the receiver is not cracked but again, I don't know their proceedure for this if it was.

So my goals for this are to one, remove the shellac mess that is on it, clean the stock up nicely and probably linseed oil it and to shoot it occasionally. Not competitively but more to just know that it works and is relatively accurate. I think the stock will clean up OK, it's in fairly decent shape with a few of the usual dings and gouges. I can't tell if it's been sanded down already but that possibility exists as the brass pins are longer than the wood is wide. Cleaning the bore and action is also a definate. It is very dry now and that was one of the reasons why the bolt may not be cycling smoothly according to the sales guy.

The big red flag is that this rifle has been in their store for almost two years now. It had been $400 up until a few weeks ago when they reduced all their milsurps that have been there for a while. So it's like I'm missing something with it that all the other guys that go through that place aren't. It's a pretty heavily traveled gun/sportsman shop.

Any opinions on the condition/value etc would be greatly appreciated. As my last milsurp purchases were a British 303 and a Swedish Mauser from Woolworths for less than $100 each and a Mosin Nagant for $89 two weeks ago, this is a pretty big step up in price for me. I'm not intending to resell the rifle so profit is not an issue but I don't want to lose money on it either with a bad purchase and a rifle I have no chance of using.

Aragorn

A shootable M1917 for $300, yes buy it. It may not be perfect but is worth ever bit of $300. No worries as to strength of receiver steel. The odds of you getting one with a cracked receiver are so remote, at that price I would not worry about it. Headspace might be a small problem, M1917’s usually have generous headspace, but not enough to worry about. If the bore is NRA Good or better (and it sounds as if it is) and the stock is sound you should be already on your way.

Before you buy,, look the stock over closely, a replacement will run the price up. If you are refinishing the wood, I would suggest turpentine and real Tung Oil,, 50/50 for first coat.

45B20

The stock seems to be sound just covered with that shellac. Are you suggesting I check it closely for soundness or for not being original (sanded, etc).

In this case, I would be much more worried about cracks.

45B20

Being that it is a late 1918 rifle, the receiver hardness or brittleness shouldn't be an issue from what I've read but again, not sure. That it is a military rebarrel would also seem to indicate that the receiver is not cracked but again, I don't know their proceedure for this if it was.

some facts...
P14,s and 1917,s were ALL 3.5% Nickel steel, and surface hardened, no issues with being brittle ect. they are actually very soft.
the cracked from being barreled is a stretch as well, so far, iv yet to see one cracked from rebarreling.. and no one has posted a picture of one as of yet.
not saying it isnt possible, just unlikely.
they are without a doubt one of the strongest actions ever made.

According to the various articles I've read last night and this morning, Eddystone rifles have a reputation for cracking at the receiver during re-barreling. It isn't the installation of the new barrel which is the problem, they seem to crack when the old one is removed because they were installed so tight. They recommend cutting stress lines into the old barrel before removal. Most sources all say it is a very strong action.

There is also an example of an Eddystone which had a brittle receiver similar to those of the early Springfield 03's.

I don't know how common any of these issues are, probably not very. It apparently was a serious issue with the early 03's.

I'm just trying to be somewhat cautious with this purchase without being overly so. There just seems to be so much conflicting information out there. I never even really worried about the headspace in other old rifles I've bought, probably wouldn't in this one either if I hadn't looked and seen all sorts of warnings about it.

The cracked receiver worry is seriously overrated. Often repeated, never seen a pic of an actual example. As already stated, the problem was in the removal of old barrels, not the fitting of new ones. I would assume that an arsenal-overhauled rifle is OK in this respect.

It seems that the M1917s that were arsenal-overhauled for WWII were hardly used for serious action, and so your worry should be bore damage through neglect (pitting) or overenthusistic use of the pull-through (bell-mouthing) rather than anything else.

Likewise the headspace "issue" - which is all too often a user error. The question arises because the M1917 bolt has an enormous camming action. This means that you think the rifle has excessive headspace, because the bolt closes on a NOGO gauge, whereas in fact the gauge has been squashed by the huge camming force! The result is a ruined gauge and a rifle that is erroneously judged to be faulty.

When using a gauge, just about no force should be applied - let the bolt fall by its own weight!

And if you are still worried about those cracks - take the action out of the stock, clean it, and then wipe over with a rag soaked in acetone or a similar highly volatile fluid. A crack will be shown by a thin damp line as the acetone dries faster on the surface than in the crack. Any crack that is not shown up by this test would probably require ultrasonic testing to find it.

For 300 (pounds, dollars or euros) I would get it, clean it and shoot it. But search these forums thoroughly first, for advice on refurbishing old service rifles. The techniques are similar to all bolt-action rifles.

"For the most part, I've sought inexpensive pieces that are in good functional shape and just need a bit of TLC to clean them up etc."

I agree wholeheartedly with that - most milsurps are neglected rather than defective. Good luck with your M1917!

Patrick

I wrote this thing up before I saw Patrick's very good post, but Iam going to add it anyway just for added information:

Aragorn

What articles did you read?? did the authors cite any first person accounts?? did any of the authors present their sources?? Regrettably, a lot of information on the web is not trustworthy or just plain hogwash.
Brittle receiver steel in an assembled, passed proof M1917?? I would like to see their source.

The Eddystone cracked receiver ring story has been blown way out of portions (just like the 03 low numbers thing). C.B. Ferris has a nice concise overview of the problem on pg.167. Out of interest I am going thru my 1950 to 60 American Rifleman and see what I can find, Triggs has an article on the subject in June of 60, AR. I will let you know if I find anything important.

During the early 60s I did my apprenticeship to be a gunsmith. One of my less enjoyable jobs was cleaning and inspecting the surplus rifles and pistols that went thru the shop, many in bulk for other stores. I inspected each Eddystone for a crack receiver ring (we used kerosene and a heat lamp) and after perhaps 200 of the things, I found exactly zero, none. I was shown one with a receiver crack, it appeared to still be an unmussed with GI. Some years later I went thru another 100 Eddystones (yep, all Eddystones) for an auto parts chain, (Western Auto??) and still did not find one.

The headspace thing is another overdone subject. When I say 17s headspace is looser than 03s, what I mean is: most M1903s will not close on a 1.946” (NoGo) gauge, and most M1917s will. However few M1917s will close on the 1.950” (Field Reject) gauge, and this is the gauge that counts. The catastrophe that some people envision will occur if a rifle with headspace of over 1.950” (talking about .30 Cal here) is fired, is BS. With good ammo nothing will happen except making the cases hard to resize and short case life. I once had the opportunity to check what happen when a .30 Cal was fired with excessive headspace. We did not even get a ruptured case until headspace reached 1.970“,, and then maybe only one or two out of twenty rounds, at 1.980” we were getting a ruptured case about every round. This was all GI ammo of mixed lots, using two M1919A4s, we also ran the same test using four 50 Cal M2 HBs, (what the test was really supposed to be run on but we fudged).

Stop being such a worry wart. For $300 I think it is still a very good buy and be sure to order a copy of “United States Rifle Model of 1917” by C.S. Ferris, best single book on the subject. OR, buy the book and then go looking for a M1917.

45B20

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 45B20

Aragorn

What articles did you read?? did the authors cite any first person accounts?? did any of the authors present their sources?? Regrettably, a lot of information on the web is not trustworthy or just plain hogwash.
Brittle receiver steel in an assembled, passed proof M1917?? I would like to see their source.

45B20

---

Here is the article which mentions the brittle Eddystone receiver:

http://www.fulton-armory.com/LNSpringfieldLowRes.pdf

It is primarily about the early Springfields but there is one Eddystone that they did their "test" on, although reading it again, this may be a receiver that was sent to him and cracked when being rebarreled.

On the receiver cracks, nearly all the articles on this were from message boards similar to this one and seemed to be "words of wisdom" passed down from person to person so accuracy is questionable.

CMP is selling what they call salvage grade rifles for $300. These rifles are missing the bolts and possibly other parts.

A service grade which it appears the rifle I'm looking at is selling for $500 when they have them.

Are these prices for real?

ok, well i read through that pretty quick, and i must say it made me laugh,
though i dont doubt the writers claim, i questions his testing just a bit.
my first redflag is his background of an ART director, and not a gunsmith, machinest or metalurgist,
what supprised me even more is that anyone would grab a good rifle and wack it over a railroad track..the term duuuh comes to mind..
it was geared mostly at low numbered 03,s and ill argue the fact anyday about his testing as well.
yes, i have Hatchers notebook, and if he actually read the thing he would have came to the same conclusion as i did.
that the SHT 1903,s failed from bore obstruction, early Zinc bullets, firing 8mm Mauser in them ect..
and its not that the SHT 03 will just fail at the drop of a hat, its how they handled a failure.
you can blow any rifle up and you dont have to try that hard.
its how the metal acts when it fails. the SHT 03,s tended to shatter, DHT broke as well, but they didnt shatter, the NS 03,s pealed away like a banana peal so to seak.
the 03 is 2% NS, and surface hardened, as is the Remington 03,s and A3,s
the Smith Corona A3 is 2.5% NS, and Heat treated through and through.
likely the toughest reciever made. {iv drilled them i know}
all M1917,s were 3.5% NS, and surface hardened, and as i said before, very soft, iv bent them before, they do bend back..that was a ohS*% momment.
so...without knowing the history of the sportered 17 or the the one he busted over a railroad track..the real facts will never be known.
were they in a fire at one time? rusted? dont know,, he didnt say.
i for one doubt the claim of a box of cracked 17 recievers, pictures? serial numbers???
so far i am the only one to show a picture of a cracked 17 on the net that i know of, if anyone else has a one,.by all meens share..
i dont doubt that some 17,s Eddystone,Remington and Winchester, cracked do to pour barrel removal or installations over the years..but..
but they are rare indeed.
youll likely find more modern rifles 700,s 110,s 77,s with cracks then 1917,s
ill dig out the picture of the cracked 17 i had..

this was a sporterized 1917 that was sent to me to remove the nice original barrel that it had for a original 17 he wanted rebarreled.
after i pulled the barrel, set the other rifle up, i noticed that this one had some issues, and had likely had heavy rust or had been in a fire at one time.
and the first out of hundreds of 17,s iv seen with a crack in the receiver ring, also notice the lug ways are scalled badly, and a lot of wear.
they other 17 that cracked was from the same thing,,a fire, a hot fire as well, it cracked back by the bolt latch, and not the ring, it ended up as art deco, for display for the boyscouts.

The CMP prices are real.. and they are not always in stock.

As others have said for $300 I would take it home. I picked up my first M1917 (Eddystone) a week or so ago and paid more than $300. My 1st M1917 - Military Surplus Collectors Forums

The stock may clean up real nice and then you would have a great shooter with a good bit of history... a win/win :beerchug:

I hope to shoot mine this weekend.

Good luck

I bought it today. Couldn't stand leaving it there. The guy that knew more about the rifle was there today. The stock has been refinished, I knew that. The rear sight is missing the peep sight when it is in the down position. The ladder sight is intact. The rifling is shallow but it is a two groove rifling and I'm wondering how deep that was to begin with. They did allow me to take it apart to check the receiver and the barrel under the wood. Receiver checked out ok with no visible cracks with the liquid test. Barrel has almost no rust on the exterior under the wood. A very small amount that I believe will come off easily with steel wool. The small portion of the barrel that is exposed has more rust on it but I checked it after getting it home and it too appears to only be surface rust.

The finish on the stock comes off pretty easily. It has been sanded with a vibrating sander (I recognize the marks as I have one) and probably not hand sanded afterwords. Stock looks pretty nice under the crap they put on it.

Metal needs cleaned pretty bad but doesn't appear to have much rust on it or pitting. Front sight is a bit loose.

Original price was not $399 but $499, they had it sitting there at that price for two years with no takers and decided it was time to get rid of it and try to regain some of the money they had in it. They were taking a loss in selling it to me for $299.

I will post some photos when I have more time and I'm sure will probably have a few more questions at some point.

And thanks for the advice. I believe I will be quite happy with this once it is cleaned up.

sounds like a good buy, 2 groove barrels are likely a JA Johnson Automatice barrel,
nothing wrong with them at all, all the ones iv delt with have shot very well.

The nicest (by far) 2 groove Johnson barrel I ever had was no good. It would "pop over" at around 35 rounds from heat. Completely lose its bedding and climb 12 -18 inches on target. I took it to Perry, came home and sold it!!! Only M1917 I have ever had with this problem. By far the HS barrels are keepers, no question about it. I have 2 mint Winny M1917's, but they are too mint to use in matches. Oh, my. The Winny's were highly regarded by the Brits in WWI, and they should know.

"Are these prices for real?"

- Why do you think we are advising you to get the rifle (unless, of course, it is obviously faulty - but you have got to do some evaluation yourself)?
Even wrecks have a value when plundered for parts.

I came across both pitting and bell-mouthing when looking for an M1917. So when I finally found one with a mint bore, but well dinged woodwork (from 90 years of being shunted from one arsenal to another), I didn't fret about the state of the wood or wonder if I might find a cheaper one if I looked for several more years, but bought the rifle on the spot. I know that many collectors buy "pretty", but I buy "performance". That's just my taste, and no-one has to agree.

And I don't use headspace gauges, since I don't fire headspace gauges, but loaded cartridges. Sorry if that sounds sarcastic, but the real criterion is head clearance, the space left between the base of a real cartridge case and the bolt face. Which is +0.006" for my rifle/ammo combination. Small clearance is good, but negative clearance means that the rounds are being cammed into the chamber. And rim thicknesses etc have manufacturing tolerances too!

Don't worry - be happy! Go and get it.
And get the books!

Patrick

My Eddystone groups beautifully. As long as the receiver isn't stretched or one of the brittle ones that weren't properly hardened, an Eddystone is a great addition.

You are thinking of low number 03's. There was never a problem with a P-14 or 1917 having bad heat treating on the receivers.

Sounds like a great deal, frankly!

Went to a gun show today and was lucky to come across a rear sight to replace the broken one on my 1917. $5 all Eddystone and better condition than the one that was on it. No luck with the ejector however. The same fellow had one of them as well but was a bit pricey on that, surprising considering how much he sold the sight for.

Dude, lets see some pics! :dunno::D

I'll try to remember some pics on Sunday. I have a before photo, a photo with half the shellac removed and I'll have to take an after photo.

I've never posted photos here before so it might take a while to get them right. I have a photobucket account and I would assume you can link directly to them from here?

Aragorn243,

It's easy to post photos here from 'Photobucket'

1) Copy the URL (Direct link) from your photo in Photobucket

2) Go to the message window under the posts and click on the 'Go Advanced' button under it.

3) In the next screen there is a yellow button with two little mountains in the menu above the text area just to the right of center. Click on it and a small box opens where you paste the URL from Photobucket -

4) The code/URL for your photo will be entered inside the text area wherever your cursor is flashing inside the text box.

5) Click the 'Preview Post' button under the text box, and at the top of the next page that comes up you can see how your photo and text will look like before you click the 'Submit Reply' button that's to the left of the 'Preview Post' button.

If you did something wrong, or you don't like the positioning, etc, you can do it over and keep previewing until you like it.

This is the before photo of my 1917 as purchased for $299. It has a shiny, reddish cast shellac on it.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_5836-1.jpg




This is the after photo with half a dozen coats of BLO.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_5946-1.jpg




A close up of the finish and the extractor which has some uneven wear on it. I may try polishing it or replace it at some point. It works fine.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_5837-1.jpg




Closeup of finish after BLO

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_5943-1.jpg




This is the first stage in removing the shellac using a knife blade and lightly scraping. I have worked it from the receiver to the butt.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_5838-1.jpg




After other side:

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_5942-1.jpg




And my new sight installed:

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_5944-1.jpg




The camera doesn't really give justice to how bad that shellac looked.

With the new sight, I have $304 into this so far. I had all the refinishing materials on hand. I still need an ejector. Might try converting the broken one into the compression spring type and getting a small spring.

I bought a 1917 at CMP for $300 from the salvage rack. It looked better than any other and had good life left in the barrel. I did notice a scratch on the receiver, but felt it was superficial. Wrong! My son asked about it and said I needed to get a gunsmith to check it out. It was a crack. For $150 he welded and heat treated it and it shoots great. So it's a $450 rifle instead of a $300. Still a bargain. I will probably refinish it but have some other projects in front of it.

This is my first post by the way. I have a sick Garand that brought led me to this site. More on that later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cpd109

I bought a 1917 at CMP for $300 from the salvage rack. It looked better than any other and had good life left in the barrel. I did notice a scratch on the receiver, but felt it was superficial. Wrong! My son asked about it and said I needed to get a gunsmith to check it out. It was a crack. For $150 he welded and heat treated it and it shoots great. So it's a $450 rifle instead of a $300. Still a bargain. I will probably refinish it but have some other projects in front of it.

This is my first post by the way. I have a sick Garand that brought led me to this site. More on that later.

---

id like to see pictures of that, and know how someone reheatreated a receiver.

Aragorn, I would have bought that gun for $300 in a New York minute! I used to have a Remington and I miss it. Nice wood by the way.

Thanks Mike,

I think it came out pretty nice. One of these days I'll take it to the range and see how it shoots. I'm not much for open sights so I don't have real high expectations for a tight group. If I hit the paper and get a 5 inch group I'll be feeling pretty good about it. I have three Nagants and an SKS to take to the range to try out too.

Hard to believe it's been almost a year now since I got this rifle fixed up. Never did locate an ejector for it so being it's a rainy day I dug out my dremel, took out the broken ejector, found an ink pen with a spring (probably the hardest part) and did the spring fix this afternoon. Works great and was a lot easier than I expected.

I still have one concern with it that requires some attention. The front sight is still loose. I see how all the parts work up there and the long pin that holds it in the groove seems to be too short. I doubt it moves enough to seriously impact the type of shooting I plan for it but it is bothersome. What would the proper fix for this be?

I also performed the bullet "test" on the muzzle, bullet does not even come close to bottoming out on the case so the barrel does not appear to be shot out.

Warm weather approaching fast so I hope to finally take it to the range soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aragorn243

The front sight is still loose. I see how all the parts work up there and the long pin that holds it in the groove seems to be too short. I doubt it moves enough to seriously impact the type of shooting I plan for it but it is bothersome. What would the proper fix for this be?

---

Do you mean the sight blade or the sight block? Loose dovetails on sight blades can be tightened by peening the underneath face of the dovetail on the blade (not the block!). If the sight block is loose, the simplest, and indeed best fix is to soft-solder it*. You rub down and tin the surfaces that will not be visible after assembly, and then sweat the pre-tinned components together.

:wave:

*This is a proper fix, not Bubba-ring, and is to be recommended as it is reversible.

Patrick,

I looked up an exploded view of the front sight. The spline and the sight carrier are what is loose. I'm assuming that is what you are calling the sight block. I can see how I could tin the inside of the sight carrier where it would be hidden.

Is the tinning standard silver soldier used for copper plumbing fittings or something else? I wasn't aware it would stick to steel if it is the same stuff.

Found a video showing a fellow doing just this on an M28, very similar type front sight without the spline. Looks like just the ticket, thanks Patrick.

That rifle came out very nice Sir! I would be proud to own it.

Tried the soldering this evening and met with complete and utter failure. Not sure if I have the wrong stuff, didn't clean it well enough or what. The solder refused to adhere to the steel except in a few very small places. Tried rubbing it in and it just rolled right off. It is the same stuff I use for copper water lines, lead free solder and flux which says it works on steel. Made three attempts, no luck with any.

I did not remove the blueing, is that the problem?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aragorn243

I did not remove the blueing, is that the problem?

---

:thdown:

You said it! Blueing is just a special kind of rust!

That is why I wrote "You rub down and tin the surfaces that will not be visible after assembly, and then sweat the pre-tinned components together."

The steel surfaces must be absolutely blank and degreased: wire-wooled*, swabbed with acetone, and then use something like "Fry's solder paste" to tin the surfaces. The resin flux in electronic solder seems to be useless on steel. You really do need the good old-fashioned acidic paste flux, 60-40 lead-tin solder, and to hell with fancy ROHS/green-planet-ecologically-responsible-save-the-environment materials that just cost more and make a mess without actually producing a mechanically sound joint.

And, of course, you must clean off any flux remains aftwards!

*on the barrel: to save the visible blueing, wrap electrician's tape around the barrel, leaving free just the ring that you want to tin. Then use the wire wool, degrease, wipe on the paste flux and tin the blank area! Remove the tape after tinning, as the flux tends to spatter onto other surfaces that you do not wish to spoil!

Patrick
:wave:

Were JA barrels only used in WW2 , what year did that start?

I'll have to check into getting soldier that has lead in it. I know I don't have any as it is prohibited for use with plumbing fixtures. I don't do a lot of plumbing but I'm used to the solder sticking after using the flux and this was just beading up and running right off. Frustrating. Figured I was doing something wrong.

Thanks again for the help. I'll get it cleaned off completely and make another attempt after finding some solder.

All you need is what used to be very ordinary eutectic solder, as used in the electronics industry. Quite simply because the eutectic (roughly 60-40) tin-lead has the lowest melting point, and you don't want to have to heat up the barrel more than absolutely necessary. Just ask for it in a shop that sells electronics components. For heaven's sakes, you are reparing a firearm, not saving the planet.:lol: Funny how no-one seems to cotton on to the idea that a better way to reduce heavy metal contamination would be not to make most of the electronics junk to start off with!

Oh dear... I feel a rant coming on... perhaps because I am writing this on a top-of-the-range computer that started going wrong 5 minutes after the guarantee ran out. I will feel much better if I go down to the cellar and carry on restoring my 100-150 year old rifles using my 75-year old lathe with milling attachment, the shaper of the same vintage, and working with century-old hand tools. After a lifetime in the electronics industry, all the sophisticated equipment I developed has long since been turned into problematical scrap, while I continue to work with tools and on equipment that could have been used by my great-grandfather.

Think about it: if we do a good job, the results may well outlast anything we do in present-day engineering!

Patrick
:wave:

Patrick,

I located the correct solder and met with success this evening. The front sight is now fixed to the barrel and it's even facing in the correct direction. Thanks again.

Had no problems once I got the blueing off.

Thanks for the positive feedback. I am glad to hear that it worked. It makes all that slaving away over a hot keyboard worthwhile!

:wave:

I am slow, yes, very slow. It's been 2 1/2 years since I purchased this rifle and 1 1/2 years since I got the front sight squared away. It made it to the range today. I have to admit to being worried/concerned with how this would shoot and that is part of the reason I think it did not go sooner. Decided to settle the matter once and for all. I'm not much of a target shooter, I tend to rush things a bit rather than settle down with a good sight picture. I also don't shoot well with open sights.

I shot five shots for record, no practice, no sighting in. The group showed no evidence at all of keyholing, paper looked perfect. The group size was 3 1/4 inches at 50 yards. Not the best but it impressed the heck out of the guys next to me that weren't hitting the paper. I was using Remington core-loks

In comparison, I also took and shot my K11 for the first time today. These two rifles both aged about 95 years. The group for the K11 was 2 1/4 inches at 50 yards. I was using GP11

And finally, I took my WASR 10 along as well, mainly as a function check and not expecting much out of it and again, the first time I ever fired it. Worked perfectly. First two shots were 1/2 inches apart and then I got cocky and shot too fast. Five shot group still beat the 1917 at 3 inches. I then did a rapid fire drill with 15 rounds and off hand and hit the paper 11 out of the 15 in what turned out to be a 7 1/4 inch group low and to the left. No proof but I expect the other 4 were just off to the left of the paper.

What's a WASR 10 ????

Romania Ak 47 export version, semi-automatic.

these rifles left the factory as 'all' one mfgr parts , mixing of mfgr parts occurred in use , the stocks had only the mfgr ID at the muzzle end and the "P" and a few stampings around the trigger guard , any other cartuche would be a rework marking , the WWII replacement bbls were OK , but it was quite common for these rifles to end up at a VFW as parade rifles and fired with blanks at funerals and such , not well cleaned and this resulted in bad bores ,

they are very strong actions - often sported and rechambered for hunting loads and these rifles were very accurate for military rifles , glad you got that one cleaned up and back in action

The bore isn't exactly good. That's why I was so concerned with it. The rifling is shallower than any other I've seen but it is extremely wide, it's a two groove replacement barrel. I expect this one has seen plenty of use as a parade rifle. Exterior looks fine, bore is pitted. Not deeply but it is a dark bore that simply won't clean up for anything. I felt it had a decent chance to be a shooter because it passed the bullet in the muzzle test with flying colors. Doesn't even come close to going in beyond the curve. I believe it will shoot better the second time out as I won't be so concerned with it not shooing well. I wasn't taking the time to get a nice sight picture and for what I was doing, the group wasn't bad. The cases and primers look very good, no issues with head space or the chamber being pitted.

My Eddystone P17 is one of my all time favorite rifles to shoot. The heft and the feel of it just makes it a pleasure.
Good job on yours Aragorn243.