Crazy Results in Firing different types of .30-06 loads in a M1917 Enfield

Today I really got a chance to take my Eddystone M1917 with a Johnson Automatics two groove barrel and run several loads through the rifle. The rifle is equipped with a Parker-Hale PH5B rear sight with variable PH eyepiece. First I shot a group at 100 yards with .30-06 Springfield ammunition loaded with a 168 grain Sierra Matchking BTHP bullets. This load I use in My M1 National Match with great results. X's and 10's all day. When I shot these rounds in the M1917 Enfield the bullets are keyholing with a nice grouping at 100 yards!! When I used the standard M2 Ball round all of the shots were in the X's and 10 ring. Anybody knows what is going on here? I have shot the 168gr Sierra Matchkings in a two groove barrel on my Remington M1903A3 with excellent results.

--fjruple

Possibly the barrel tolerances are on the large side. The flat base bullet "slugs up" and fits better, the BTHP flops around a bit and is sloppy at 100. Try the BT farther out, they may not be as bad although something out of balance usually does not correct itself. I have a 5 groove original barrel and it likes flat base or fatter boat tails (Hornady 303/7.7 FMJ at 0.3105"). You might give these a try too. The other thing that might be better is the M72 bullet from the original M1 30-06 loads (172 grain BT but open base, the MK has a hollow point). Sometimes you can find these as pulled and at good prices. Other FMJ BT's may also be open base but I don't have any to compare. Hornady and Remington come to mind. I would stay away from pulled M-80 7.62x51, they would be better at 100 but I have found them not very accurate.

Dave

Obviously they aren't stabilizing, likely for the reasons mentioned. I'd change to a flat base bullet and see what gives. Your match bullets have a small barrel bearing surface. You could try some 165 gr hunting bullets to see...close to the 168s.

I agree with going to a flat base bullet. The 2 groove barrel in my No4 Enfield does the same thing with boatails.
The original '06 load is 150gr bullet @ 2700fps.
I would load up some 150gr flat base bullets and keep the velocity down some.
Remember it's a 26" barrel so you can load it down a little from the 24" barrel loads to achieve the same velocity. - Bill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wineman

Possibly the barrel tolerances are on the large side. The flat base bullet "slugs up" and fits better, the BTHP flops around a bit and is sloppy at 100.

---

Make that "Probably..."

This is what happens when a BT is fired in a typically worn military chamber with a longer-than-SAAMI/CIP throat:
1) If the cartridge is new, or a fully-calibrated reload, the play between the cartridge case and chamber means that the neck is sitting on the bottom of the chamber, so the centerline of the bullet is below the centerline of the barrel.

IMPROVEMENT 1: use neck-sized cases only, leaving a little uncalibrated ring about 1mm long at the base of the neck to center the neck and bullet in the chamber.

2) When fired, the neck expands, and the bullet moves forwards along this line below the barrel centerline.

3) The hot gases rushing out of the gap between the expanded neck and the bullet - mainly ABOVE the bullet - will create an asymmetrical force on the bullet. The result is that the bullet tilts as much as the play in the chamber and throat will permit.

4) A worn throat increases the blow-by effect as it gives the bullet even more opportunity to tip before it engages the lands.

5) And using BTs makes it worse, as the gap between bullet and the expanding neck opens up that much earlier. And the short cylindrical section permits more tilt for a given radial play.

IMPROVEMENT 2: use a bullet with a longer cylindrical section
AND/OR IMPROVEMENT 3 - a slightly larger diameter IF the bore is truly enlarged (CAUTION: overpressure is possible) .
IMPROVEMENT 4: Seat the bullet further out - if possible. (CAUTION: overpressure is possible). Flatbase bullets give you more freedom to do this.

4) The skewed bullet is now rammed into the lead at an angle. Emerging from the muzzle at an angle, it will precess, fly in a corkscrew trajectory, and possibly tip.
As was observed in the case under discussion.

PLAUSIBILITY CHECK. Calculate the skew over the approximately cylindrical portion of a boattail that corresponds to 1 MOA. It is horribly small!
Now one begins to understand why benchrest shooters take such care with throat diameter etc.

Somewhere in over 4000 posts I presented this all with photos. Try searching for "neck sizing" and boat-tails. The essence is: for worn barrels, do NOT use boat-tails.

P.S: in my experience, the Sellier & Bellot "SPCE" hunting bullets perform very well in old milsurps as they have a flat base and a long cylindrical section.

Patrick,

Well said. I would think that this excellent advice should get him shooting straight with non Matchking bullets.

Dave

Well-- you guys gave plenty of food for thought on this issue. I believe the first thing I have to do is slug the barrel to get a true diameter. If the barrel is oversized from wear or manufacture I will move up to a .311 diameter bullet. If the bore is nominal for the .30-06 springfield I will check the throat for erosion. The next group of rounds will be neck sized only. I will probably try a bullet with a longer cylindrical section and one with a flat base and see what happens. Thanks for every ones help and I keep you posted on my progress.

Cheers

--fjruple

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick Chadwick

Somewhere in over 4000 posts I presented this all with photos. Try searching for "neck sizing" and boat-tails. The essence is: for worn barrels, do NOT use boat-tails.

---

Found it!

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread....ht=neck-sizing

Scroll down to Post #139

if you follow the simple methods outlined here, you can make good ammo for an old, worn service rifle without wasting (IMOH) time and money on expensive gauges.

Have fun, and let us all know how it goes!

Patrick

I am inclined to throat erosion.

It sounds like a former drill rifle faire with blanks. Throat gone but the end still perfect.

Do you have the TE tool?

Hi guys--

I thought I would give you and up date. I have a throat erosion guage and the barrel swallowed it. I suspect RC20 is right and the M1917 was a veterans gun that shot a lot of blanks at funerals and never cleaned. I also purchases another Eddystone M1917 that appears to have been rebuilt during WWII which has a Winchester 1-19 dated barrel and many Winchester and Remington parts. Unfortunately that barrel was toast too. TE was about a 5.5 or more and muzzle wear guage fell to the end. I counterbored the muzzle and the barrel would only a occasionally throw a bullet about six feet from the target at 100 yards. Its ashame the barrel was not clean it looks like the barrel was new at one point due to the strong rifling. I suspect this rifle was also a veterans funeral rifle and never cleaned. I have removed both barrels from the receivers and ordered two new M1917 .30-06 barrels made by Criteron. I will put both barrels on and see what happens.

Cheers

--fjruple

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fjruple

I have removed both barrels from the receivers and ordered two new M1917 .30-06 barrels made by Criteron. I will put both barrels on and see what happens.

---

It'll sort out all the problems with accuracy, that's what.

Well here is an update. I received the two barrels from Deans Gun Restorations. Got them on today and will take them out on Sunday to see how they shoot. The barrels were by Criteron and well made. The barrels clocked perfectly and a final reaming was done with a pull through .30-06 National Match reamer. The guns were reassembled and everything went together OK. I will let you know how the work out'

Fjruple

My M1917 Criterion barrels were spot-on required no final finish reaming. My barreling job was done at a Gunsmithing College by the class teacher. So I know what is up. I am a little surprised to read you finished reamed it. It is very easy to head space a M1917 and get false readings. I hope you guys are right and I am wrong on this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Calif-Steve

My M1917 Criterion barrels were spot-on required no final finish reaming. My barreling job was done at a Gunsmithing College by the class teacher. So I know what is up. I am a little surprised to read you finished reamed it. It is very easy to head space a M1917 and get false readings. I hope you guys are right and I am wrong on this.

---

Calif-Steve--
These Criterion barrels were advertised as requiring a finishing reamer to make the final cut. The barrels were the first barrels I have seen from a maker that clocked up both to 1/4 inch from the indexing marks. Some folks like to use a standard finishing reamer. I for one like to mate the receiver, bolt and barrel as a unit. The pull through finishing reamer achieves the results. Most match shooters used this method for the best results.

I am going out this morning to give both guns a test run and set the front sight and see how they function. I will post pictures later with the test results.

--fjruple

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fjruple

I am going out this morning to give both guns a test run

---

And we'll be here...can't wait.

I had the same experience with the index on my criterion replacement. I then finished with a pull through reamer until the bolt closed on some HXP. Results were very good to say the least.

Well folks, I am back to give you the results of yesterdays test firing of the two Model of 1917 Eddystone Enfields with their new barrels. The test were conducted with National Match grade .30-06 Springfield ammunition the ammunition was 168gr Sierra BTHP Matchkings loaded with 45gr of Accurate 2520 with CCI Benchrest primers.

The Range used was 100 yards.

Attachment 77039

I tested the Enfield that was equipped with the Parker-Hale PH5B target sights and standard front sight blade. The chamber was still a little tight to chamber. I will probably leave it alone at least for now.

Attachment 77037

Attachment 77038

After I clocked the sight in this was the results of 14 shots of NM ammo. I had several flyers as you see. The target was a NRA simulated 600 yards target.

Attachment 77042

The 2nd Eddystone was only equipped with the standard battle sights and It took me awhile to walk the front sight into proper position. The chamber was perfect on this rifle.

Attachment 77043

As you can see from the target below I finally got the rifle sighted in on the last shot, an X. Unfortunately I did not have any additional ammunition with me to confirm the X. This target was a NRA 200 yards simulated target.

Attachment 77044

Back to the range next Sunday to re-confirm the 2nd Enfields sighting. Hope you all enjoyed this post.

Cheers

--fjruple

They look to be where they're supposed to be, more or less. I'd say this exercise was successful.

I took a look on the Criterion website and they are sold as slightly short. Makes sense. My barrel required no reaming at all and screwed on tight first time. Very nicely made and a very good shooter. I do like the barrel and recommend them to all.

I have been fortunate in that my guns are ok for TE and MW.

My brother had one (1903) that was awful.

We did get it on paper 6 inch groups at 50 yds with 200 gr flat base going slow!

TE and MW gauge are extremely important in that regard.

Cool you do your own barrels, when I change barrels its on a Savage!

Quote:

---

After I clocked the sight in this was the results of 14 shots of NM ammo. I had several flyers as you see. The target was a NRA simulated 600 yards target.

---

That makes me feel pretty good, I usually can get in that area with my 2 grove JA and the original Remington Barrel on the Remington.

Both are 2s. for TE and MW.