New P14

I had posted some pics of this rifle before. Decided to buy it last week. Curious as to thoughts on value given a few condition issues.

The good:
Intact volley sights
Retains brass disc in stock
Excellent bore

The bad:
Bolt does not match receiver. Barrel and receiver match though
Stock has been cleaned and most of orginal patina removed. But seems original stain is intact. Almost like someone use a solvent and maybe steel wool to even out stock. Some spots still retain original finish

Does anyone know what the markings on brass disc indicate or a resource that would?

Just rub out the wood with some raw linseed oil and it'll come right back to life. :thup:

I believe that the brass butt disc without a centre screw is unusual; I don't recall seeing this before. I guess it must be glued in?

Very nice, how is the bore on it?

The reason I ask is I have a P-14 with the same import mark (I think) which also retains the volley sights and has a different bolt number. The bore is also mint. It would be interesting if these were shipped as the same batch (though I have no idea how mine made it to Canada, as normally we don't get import marked rifles).

Eaglelord,

I would'nt describe the bore as "mint", but it is "very good to excellent" IMO. Strong sharp rifling and fairly shiny. The barrel is at least the equal of the overall rifle and should be no obstacle to shootability or doesn't bring the gun down.

I bought it mainly to preserve it for a collector and flip. I paid $400, so think I can find it a good home for it someday and not get hurt. I told the seller it was probably a $700 rifle retail.

I hadn't noticed the lack of a screw in the bass disc until F10UK mentioned it, but it looks, to my untrained eye to be Farsi or some other middle eastern letter imprinted on it. Perhaps a member here recently graduated from the sand box will comment. Regards Tom

oldpaul

Agree that the inscription on the brass disc looks like middle eastern. That was my initial thought also.

Curious when this gun was manufactured (1916 or 1917). There is a code "Y229" on the bottom of the barrel. Is that the date code. If so, any help on what that translates to manufacture year. The only other prominent number I see on bottom of barrel is a 7 by itself.

Hello, new member here but I'm a longtime milsurp lover. Your receiver looks to have the star marking just below the R E which indicates it had the larger bolt lug upgrade in December 1916. This designates the rifle as a P14 MkI*. If that is the case the volley sights are incorrect for that rifle as they were removed when this upgrade was done. There should also be a MkI* stamp on the buttstock around the makers mark if the stock is original to the rifle. I believe the daisy stamp on the bolt indicates this upgrade as well. The location of the serial number on the bolt indicates this as well because the number was originally on the underside of the bolt handle making this somewhat of a force match. With the bolt open you should see a milled half circle at the base of the barrel just before the chamber, this was done to facilitate the larger bolt lug. If you remove the hand guards there should be a year stamping on the chamber which will tell you the year it was made. Mine is on the left side of the chamber. A guesstamate based on Remington's first date of manufacture for these of 3/25/16 and an average production of 1000 rifles per day makes your rifle to be made on or around mid October 1916 which seems correct for the MkI* upgrade as all rifles made in and after December 1916 didn't require it. I know all of this after much research due to the purchase of my Remington P14 about a month ago! Mine is in the high 93,000's also with the upgrade and most of the same markings but no import mark with a guesstamate build date of 6/26/16. Oh and I'm retired so I have the time for this kind of research.
They are nice rifles and mine shoots very well, enjoy it. - Bill

Bill,

The marks below the RE is not an asterisk mark. It is like two perpendicular Vs. Like a V was struck twice. Nothing like the "daisy stamp" on bolt.

I can't find the year stamping. What will it say? 1916? There is a solitary "7". Could that mean 1917? All in all not that important, but I was wondering if next year was it 100 year birthday or 2017.

Here are a few of the pics I have of mine.

The receiver shows the "star" marking which if stamped softly can resemble some V's.
The "daisy" stamp on the bolt handle.
The date stamp on the chamber.
The milling work done to the barrel by the chamber.
The 7 your seeing could be the "broad arrow" acceptance stamp.
You can see one to the right of the date stamp.
You may have to pull the barreled action out of the stock to see the date completely, sorry about that!
Based on your serial number on the bolt she's 99 this month so you can plan the big party for next year.

Newbe here so I'm not sure what order the pics are in but I trust you guys to figure them out.
I hope these help you figure out what you have. - Bill

Bill,

You're correct about the star stamp below the RE. It's a poorly stamped star with an even more poorly stamped star immediately below it. It's as if the inspector realized his poor mark and did a worse job on the second attempt.

The chamber does have the milling you describe.

So seems like it's a reworked 16 with a different stock added at some point after the upgrade.

this one has some interesting aspects , foreign service by that disc - military aid ?

Glad I could help Dale.
I truly enjoy unlocking the secrets old milsurp rifles hold.
Now if we could only get them to talk! - Bill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oldfoneguy

Hello, new member here but I'm a longtime milsurp lover. Your receiver looks to have the star marking just below the R E which indicates it had the larger bolt lug upgrade in December 1916. This designates the rifle as a P14 MkI*. If that is the case the volley sights are incorrect for that rifle as they were removed when this upgrade was done. There should also be a MkI* stamp on the buttstock around the makers mark if the stock is original to the rifle. I believe the daisy stamp on the bolt indicates this upgrade as well. The location of the serial number on the bolt indicates this as well because the number was originally on the underside of the bolt handle making this somewhat of a force match. With the bolt open you should see a milled half circle at the base of the barrel just before the chamber, this was done to facilitate the larger bolt lug. If you remove the hand guards there should be a year stamping on the chamber which will tell you the year it was made. Mine is on the left side of the chamber. A guesstamate based on Remington's first date of manufacture for these of 3/25/16 and an average production of 1000 rifles per day makes your rifle to be made on or around mid October 1916 which seems correct for the MkI* upgrade as all rifles made in and after December 1916 didn't require it. I know all of this after much research due to the purchase of my Remington P14 about a month ago! Mine is in the high 93,000's also with the upgrade and most of the same markings but no import mark with a guesstamate build date of 6/26/16. Oh and I'm retired so I have the time for this kind of research.
They are nice rifles and mine shoots very well, enjoy it. - Bill

---

Bill, the * modification was not an "upgrade" carried out on rifles in service. It was incorporated during the manufacturing process.
The only way this would have happened as part of the Weedon programme would have been if a Mk1 rifle was found needing a rebarrel, in which case a Mk1* barrel may have been used to carry out the repair.
Just to show the difference between your MK1* and my Mk1, here's a pic of the breech area on mine.
By the way, mine appears to have escaped the Weedon process all together.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by harry mac

Bill, the * modification was not an "upgrade" carried out on rifles in service. It was incorporated during the manufacturing process.
The only way this would have happened as part of the Weedon programme would have been if a Mk1 rifle was found needing a rebarrel, in which case a Mk1* barrel may have been used to carry out the repair.
Just to show the difference between your MK1* and my Mk1, here's a pic of the breech area on mine.
By the way, mine appears to have escaped the Weedon process all together.

---

Harry, the Weedon repair standard is not what I'm referring to. The Weedon repair center performed their upgrades on P14/No3 rifles from 1939-1942 during WWII when everything that could shoot was being pressed into service. The Weedon standard was there to make sure the P14/No3's could be shot safely.

What Dalebert and I have are rifles that were changed to the .010 larger bolt lug upgrade in December 1916 which changed the rifles designation to the P14 MkI*. As a proof of this change being performed the "star" stamp was applied to the receiver by the manufactures mark as can be seen in the picture of my receiver and an asterisk stamp added to the butt. Any rifle manufactured during and after December 1916 did not require the upgrade as they were originally manufactured with the larger bolt lugs but all (if possible) rifles made between March and November 1916 were required to have the change made. When it was found a rifle hadn't had this work done previously it was done at Weedon at that time.

Please read the following which is an excerpt from the Remington Society Of America Journal page 20 - 4th quarter 2010.

In December 1916, a new bolt with a longer locking lug was approved for the .303 Pattern 1914 Mk I rifle. This necessitated a new barrel with a deeper recess for the lug. These new rifles were designated the Mk I*E (for those manufactured at Eddystone) and Mk I*R (Remington) and Mk I*W (Winchester). In today's collector market, original, unaltered P-14 Mk I rifles are rarely encountered, as few were made and many of those were converted to Mk I* configuration.

It's a very interesting read and gives volumes of information on these rifles and their manufacture.
I am including a link to the complete article so you can enjoy it as much as I have.

Remington Society of America - journals/Eddystone

It's very possible you have a rifle that has had neither of these changes made to it which would make it a somewhat rare item.
I'm sure there were some rifles that "slipped through the cracks" and had nothing done to them and if you have one that would make you a very lucky man indeed! - Bill

Harry some further information has come to light which now makes perfect sense. Initially the rifles that were to be upgraded to the larger bolt lug were suppose to have the barrel changed to facilitate this. Apparently this was deemed unnecessary and for expedience a half circle was instead machined into the existing barrel face for the larger bolt lug which created the rifles that Dalebert and I have. - Bill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oldfoneguy

Remington Society of America - journals/Eddystone

---

Great Article. A corner of history that had been so dark. Gives lots of information that adds some real color to my P-14. Thanks for the link.

As I understand it completed rifles were not upgraded to * spec, rather the spec itself was upgraded, and rifles assembled after a certain serial number would have been assembled with the upgrade already incorporated in their components. I suspect any uninstalled Mk1 barrels on hand at the time would have had their breech faces remachined to accept the longer bolt lug, but assembled rifles of Mk1 spec would have been shipped "as is".

Harry you are most likely correct. I can only reiterate information I have read but will never consider myself an expert on these rifles, at best a somewhat versed amateur!

However the rifle I have was made during mid to late June 1916 based on its serial number and published production figures, it does have the milled barrel face and was brought up to * spec someplace and sometime unknown.
Perhaps it was done by one of the various English contractors at the time of the Weedon repairs during WWII which makes more sense than pulling rifles off the line during a war unless it was deemed a dangerous condition.

My P14 didn't come in it's original stock so there are no markings that give me a definitive answer as to where and when it was changed over to * spec.
The bolt does have what appears to be a force match serial number in a non original location, no actual manufacturers markings but does have the daisy stamp.

Also what the need for the larger bolt lug was has never been explained especially on such an already robust rifle. If you have any info on this I'd love to know it.

When comparing the bolt of my M1917 to my P14 bolt it seems this change was not incorporated into the M1917, so why was it deemed necessary for the less powerful .303 round?

I assume when the new spec was introduced any already manufactured but not yet shipped rifles would have been pulled back in and had the change made in the US where possible.
I have read of an anywhere from 3 week to 3 month time lapse between manufacture, acceptance and shipment which would leave a possible window going back to September 1916 manufactured rifles which could have been modified in the US but this is purely speculation on my part. - Bill

"Does anyone know what the markings on brass disc indicate or a resource that would?"


Try the Koran! HINT - it's not "God" and it's not "Jehovah".




"foreign service by that disc - military aid ? "


I suppose you could call it that.

"The marks below the RE is not an asterisk mark. It is like two perpendicular Vs. Like a V was struck twice."


That looks to me like the British "sold out of service" mark - two broad arrows point-to-point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick Chadwick

That looks to me like the British "sold out of service" mark - two broad arrows point-to-point.

---

You are quite right Patrick however the mark referred to as the "star" is the one below that (or to the right if looking at the RE straight on).

To see it clearly make sure to remove your cursor from the photo so the control box is removed.

It also looks like a series of V's but they do not connect and a circle is formed in the center. - Bill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oldfoneguy

Harry you are most likely correct. I can only reiterate information I have read but will never consider myself an expert on these rifles, at best a somewhat versed amateur!

However the rifle I have was made during mid to late June 1916 based on its serial number and published production figures, it does have the milled barrel face and was brought up to * spec someplace and sometime unknown.
Perhaps it was done by one of the various English contractors at the time of the Weedon repairs during WWII which makes more sense than pulling rifles off the line during a war unless it was deemed a dangerous condition.

My P14 didn't come in it's original stock so there are no markings that give me a definitive answer as to where and when it was changed over to * spec.
The bolt does have what appears to be a force match serial number in a non original location, no actual manufacturers markings but does have the daisy stamp.

Also what the need for the larger bolt lug was has never been explained especially on such an already robust rifle. If you have any info on this I'd love to know it.

When comparing the bolt of my M1917 to my P14 bolt it seems this change was not incorporated into the M1917, so why was it deemed necessary for the less powerful .303 round?

I assume when the new spec was introduced any already manufactured but not yet shipped rifles would have been pulled back in and had the change made in the US where possible.
I have read of an anywhere from 3 week to 3 month time lapse between manufacture, acceptance and shipment which would leave a possible window going back to September 1916 manufactured rifles which could have been modified in the US but this is purely speculation on my part. - Bill

---

The left lug was lengthened on the P14 because the powers that be thought the rim of the cartridge was sliding off the left edge of the bolt face before hitting the ejector. On some of these rifles, that may have been true, however I have had no such problems with my P14 Mk1. This was unnecessary on the M1917 since it was a rimless cartridge.

At the start of P14 production, there was no interchangeability between parts from the 3 manufacturers, as such the British inspectors were reluctant to accept the rifles. In the end, they did, but they were deemed substitute standard and not for front line issue. I believe the later manufactured P14 Mk1* were manufactured with some level of interchangeability.

I should correct my post in that there were "Interchangeability issues". Some parts would fit all 3 manufacturers rifles, others would not.

I also need to expand further on the issue of the extended Bolt lug relative to the P14 and M1917. Because the M1917 had a much larger extractor claw that held the case rim to the bolt face more securely than the substantially smaller claw used on the P14, the longer left lug was unnecessary on the M1917.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jakester

The left lug was lengthened on the P14 because the powers that be thought the rim of the cartridge was sliding off the left edge of the bolt face before hitting the ejector. On some of these rifles, that may have been true, however I have had no such problems with my P14 Mk1. This was unnecessary on the M1917 since it was a rimless cartridge.

---

Thanks for clearing this up for me Jake. I'd often wondered why it was done but could never find a viable explanation. Well once again I've learned something new here. - Bill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oldpaul

I hadn't noticed the lack of a screw in the bass disc until F10UK mentioned it, but it looks, to my untrained eye to be Farsi or some other middle eastern letter imprinted on it. Perhaps a member here recently graduated from the sand box will comment. Regards Tom

---

allah

OK, this is fun! I don't have a lot of these rifles since I don't collect military rifles per se: I seem to go for old, odd, or unusual rifles. I do have a couple of P14's and 2 1917's along with some Remington model 30's that were made from left-over 1917 parts. One of my P14's is like the ones being discussed here. It has an RE receiver with the *, the machined gouge in the rear face of the barrel, the serial number stamped on the outside of the bolt handle, what might be a star on the underside of the bolt handle, grind marks and illegible electric pencil marks on the outside of the bolt handle, the 16 date stamped in the usual place. The serial number is a good bit lower than those discussed here (67918). It has a mixture of parts including a Winchester stock and a smattering of "E" on small parts. The barrel has the serial number and an "R" on it.

Was the larger lug confined to extending the "prong" forward or was that lug made larger in some other way also?

It was moved forward only, to create a deeper ledge for the cartridge rim so it wouldn't slide off the edge of the extractor claw upon extraction. The bad part, is that the relief cut to the chamber face to accommodate the longer lug, resulted in the cartridge rim only being supported by approx. 1/3 of the barrels chamber face circumference , as opposed to being supported by over 3/4 of the chambers circumference on the earlier mk1.