M1917 Ammo & Rear Sight

[Enfield Enforcer]

If its 3/4 MOA at 100, technically its 1 1/2 at 200 and 2 1/4 at 300.

One you get out into the 600 yard area then its wind and sight picture that drives the results.

The gun will maintain that as far out as it stays super sonic but the sight limitations/sight picture come into play even with a scope.

Thanks - that sounds interesting !
An 2 1/4 inch group at 600 yards means appr. 57 mm for 5 shots at appr. 600 meters.. . Thats amazing.. . Could this result reached by using an original M72 National Match-Load ?.. . Or which load was it, please ? By the way, my M 1917-Example is a Eddystone-Enfield. The Serial-Number is 1048840, has anybody an information to the quality level of this M 1917-Variant ? Especially concerning the precision by using M72-Loads :-) We know that the British Army favored Winchester-Examples for P 1914-Sniperrifles.. .

Greetings Enfield Enforcer

[Cosine26]

The question is-“For what ammunition is the M1917 sight calibrated?”
At the time the M1917 was developed from the P1913, the standard cartridge of the US Army was the Caliber .30 Ball Cartridge so I would believe that it would be safe to assume that the sight would be calibrated for this cartridge.

References to the Tables of Fire for the 30-06, the 30 M1 Ball, and the 30 M2 Ball would indicate that the difference at the usable ranges is not significantly different to the average soldier to warrant re-calibration of the rear sight. Since the M1917 was not designated as the service rifle but was declared to be “substitute standard”, I do not believe that the M1917 sight would be re-calibrated for any new cartridge. As a matter of fact, I do not believe that the M1903 rear sight was recalibrated when the 30 M1 Ball or the 30 M2 Ball ammo was introduced.

Here is an excerpt from the Field Manual for the M1917 at the time it was issued during WWI.

Imgur: The magic of the Internet

FWIW

[Enfield Enforcer]

The question is-“For what ammunition is the M1917 sight calibrated?”
At the time the M1917 was developed from the P1913, the standard cartridge of the US Army was the Caliber .30 Ball Cartridge so I would believe that it would be safe to assume that the sight would be calibrated for this cartridge.

References to the Tables of Fire for the 30-06, the 30 M1 Ball, and the 30 M2 Ball would indicate that the difference at the usable ranges is not significantly different to the average soldier to warrant re-calibration of the rear sight. Since the M1917 was not designated as the service rifle but was declared to be “substitute standard”, I do not believe that the M1917 sight would be re-calibrated for any new cartridge. As a matter of fact, I do not believe that the M1903 rear sight was recalibrated when the 30 M1 Ball or the 30 M2 Ball ammo was introduced.

Here is an excerpt from the Field Manual for the M1917 at the time it was issued during WWI.

Imgur: The magic of the Internet

FWIW

Thats also an important factor. Thanks. I will study it a bit later exactly. What about the experiences with the M72 Ammo, concerning the sights and the accuracy, then ?.. . Somebody tested this ammo in this rifle, right ? :-)

[Calif-Steve]

No ammo expert here but, the WWI cartridge was the 150gr. cupro-nickel flatbase bullet. The M1 cartridge was the 172gr. boattail copper jacket modern bullet. The M2 cartridge was a 152gr. flatbase copper jacket bullet. We fought WWII, Korea and Viet Nam with the M2 cartridge. The M1 bullet was developed from Swiss M1911 ammunition and was developed after WWI. Only the French used a boattail round in WWI, no one else did so.

[JackDuggan]

The cartridge used in the M1917 was the 1906 .30 caliber, hence .30-06. After WWI the Army developed a new round, boat tail, heavier - maybe 174? - and called it the M1 ball. I'm working from memory here, so not precise on my facts. In any case, that round proved to be too long range for the existing ranges, overshooting the safe areas. Rather than change all the ranges they decided to go back to something with the characteristics of the 1906 cartridge, 150 grain, flat back, about 2700 fps - that's M2 ball.

So the closest you can really get to the original cartridge is probably something that copies M2 ball, Prvi Partizan makes a Garand round that I use and like. I haven't shot it past 300 meters though. As previously noted, the front sights are changeable to adjust your point of impact at various ranges. Mine seems to shoot a little low, and I've considered changing the front sight blade. You can find them on ebay.

Here's a link, it's about Parker Hale sights, but if you scroll down it will show zero instructions on various Enfields, to include the P14, and references the front sight height calculations you can make.
Service and Target Rifle Sights ~ A.G. and A.J. Parker, Parker-Hale and B.S.A.

[RC20]

Jack D: I have read the history, whats twisted is maybe the 174 (I think that right) was good for 3000 yards.

150 grain, a mere 2400 (all theoretically) So what range did they overshoot? Most you would see would be 1000 yard range?

[fjruple]

Hello fjruple,

that is really interesting. May i ask for the powder-charge of your load ? What about their accuracy in your M1917, for example at 300 und evtl. 700-800 yards ? Many thanks !

Greetings from Switzerland

Enfield Enforcer- I usually reload with 45 grains of IMR 4895 or A2520 with that bullet. The M1917 Eddystone I use has a new Critiron .30-06 barrel. I am also using a Parker hale 5B with 1/4 minute clicks. I have no problem cloverleafing 5 rounds together at 100 yards. Unfortunately, long distance ranges in my area are very lacking to say the least.

Cheer

--fjruple

[Enfield Enforcer]

Hello fjruple,

Thanks.

I have been"involved"in many things since this spring, only therefore i answer very late.

Okay - i see the IMR 4895-Powder is still in use. And having a look at the bullet weights, the 174 grainers are mentioned again and again.. . But not the really heavy bullets from 180 grains onwards, that is really conspicuos.. .

Greetings from the"Heidiland"
Enfield Enforcer

Enfield Enforcer- I usually reload with 45 grains of IMR 4895 or A2520 with that bullet. The M1917 Eddystone I use has a new Critiron .30-06 barrel. I am also using a Parker hale 5B with 1/4 minute clicks. I have no problem cloverleafing 5 rounds together at 100 yards. Unfortunately, long distance ranges in my area are very lacking to say the least.

Cheer

--fjruple

[Enfield Enforcer]

Cloverleaf: a really great group at 100 metres, in that case !
And the troubles with the shooting occasions we have here too, unfortunately.. . Its always"the same song"to say it it in the"same way".. We have here in Switzerland 4 or 5 Long Range-Places, but its really difficult to get the possibility to use them.. . You must for a long time"slip around someones knees", before you can use it once.. :-((
One such place is in my country here in the South-East. This spring a group of 5 shooters was able to shoot there at a distance of 1200 metres that means ca. 1312 yards. On this tank-exercise-place.
Ironically the place is in the valley where fathers family comes from.. .

fjruple, we are fellow sufferers.. . Despites this, have all a good day ! :-)

Greetings from Grison

Enfield Enforcer- I usually reload with 45 grains of IMR 4895 or A2520 with that bullet. The M1917 Eddystone I use has a new Critiron .30-06 barrel. I am also using a Parker hale 5B with 1/4 minute clicks. I have no problem cloverleafing 5 rounds together at 100 yards. Unfortunately, long distance ranges in my area are very lacking to say the least.

Cheer

--fjruple

[Enfield Enforcer]

Hello browningautorifle,

to the picture with the M1917 Enfield with Scope: i cannot say which type of scope it is. I found this picture on the web a while ago. It looks well and remembers me a bit at the old M1918 US-Telescopic Rifle.. .

The M1917 Enfield is an interesting rifle when it comes to scope use.. . This caliber, this barrel length, this accuracy..

Maybe somebody else knows the answer here for sure.. ? :-)

Greetings

QUOTE=browningautorifle;447652]Maybe...he can read it and perhaps tell us. Yes, they're old school for sure. I liked mine.[/QUOTE]