A LOVELY WINCHESTER P 14 MK1*........with pictures!!!!!!!

[harry mac]

You state that the bolt lug upgrade was incorporated into rifle production (MK1 to MK1*) around Dec 1916. Now, the rifles that went thru the W.R.S during WW2..... are you suggesting that the conversion from a MK1 to MK1* was also something completed at this time as well?..........or......once a rifle left the factory as a MK1 it stayed a MK1 thru it's entire life and never upgraded to a MK1* whether it went thru the W.R.S or not?
The reason why I ask this is, if the reason for the conversion to MK1* was the longer bolt lug ( which undoubtedly it was) and this was an upgrade also completed during the W.R.S process......have all the rifles that were upgraded to MK1* been issued new bolts incorporating the longer lug, and then stamped with rifle serial number? You just can't take a original MK1 bolt and merely add some length to the locking lug....bolt and locking lugs are the same piece of steel!!! I need you to clarify this for me. Sorry I just never heard of new bolts being issued but that's the only way I can see it if there was a W.R.S conversion to MK1*

The * conversion was outside the remit of the WRS. According to Skennerton, the * upgrade was incorporated into the manufacturing process, it was not a "retro-fit".
If rebarreling was within the WRS spec, (and I'm not sure if it was) it is possible that some Mk1 rifles became "upgraded" by default if a canibalised Mk1* barrel got fitted. In such cases it wouldn't have been necessary to replace the bolt, as a Mk1 bolt will function in a Mk1* rifle. It's also a possibility, of course that the barrel was replaced post service.
FWIW, the serial number stamping on your bolt looks original to that component.

[Promo]

I'm also having a bit of a tough time to imagine how to enlarge a locking lug. Skennerton however does not speak of "upgrades" from Mk.I to Mk.I*, just that on 21st December 1916 the Mk.I* was approved and that some transitional models were made with recessed barrels, but fitted with Mk.I breech bolts which were not marked with the star on the butt and were described as Mk.I, but when the Mk.I* breech bolt was fitted, the rifles were redesignated Mk.I* and the star was marked on the butt stock.
Could it therefore be that the "upgrade" was only referring to these transitional models where the "upgrade" was possible at all, and aside of that all rifles that don't have a * on the receiver are Mk.I, and all that have the * on the receiver are Mk.I*?

As a result to this, this particular rifle here might had been one of these transitional rifles which were made at the very beginning in January 1917 and escaped the Mk.I* order?

[oldfoneguy]

The upgrade to pre 12/16 rifles was done primarily between 1938 and 1939 at small shops throughout the Kingdom. This was done in an expedient manner in order to pump up if you will the available store of weapons needed for the now swelling ranks of the military due to the impending/existing war. If a particular rifle was in stores at that time and was considered worthy of the upgrade as opposed to being broken up for parts then the work was done to it. Even if the stock is original to the rifle there is no true way to verify unless the receiver number made its way into the barrel channel ect. It was condemned from front line service by an armorer for whatever reason, to determine that would require an in depth inspection with caliper and micrometer of every working part.
It would make no sense for a relieved barrel to be used with a short lug bolt if it was in service. The entire point of the lug change was to increase the bearing surface that the case rim came in contact with in order to prevent the round from slipping off the bolt face during fast bolt manipulation (rapid fire). Without the increased bearing surface and adding the relief to the chamber face gives even more of a gap for the round to work loose. If that is indeed the situation with your rifle then for sure the barrel wasn't replaced by an arsenal or contracted shop.
Incidentally upgrade is my own term and not a regurgitation from anyone's book. Apologies if it offends any here.

The bolt lugs size itself wasn't increased which is impossible but rather a used or new production bolt was put in it's place. If used the numbers were scrubbed and restamped as a forced match. Check the underside or the rear of your bolt handle for any evidence of grinding away an original number. Its also possible that it was a new production replacement bolt. Check for both a W and NS stampings somewhere on the bolt handle. If none it's most likely a newer manufacture bolt body and not original to the rifle.

The condemned rifles I believe didn't extend to the 20,000 serial range for Winchesters therefore your particular rifle was not part of that batch.

I agree with harry mac in that the * upgrade was a manufacturing change. The retro fit came later for the early rifles.

[Promo]

Facts on this rifle:
1. The bolt in his rifle is without any doubt the original Winchester factory font and therefore the original factory matching bolt.
2. The bolt in his rifle does NOT have the * mark on it, therefore is a non-* bolt.
3. The stock on this rifle does NOT have the * mark added, so the stock originates from a non-* rifle.

oldfoneguy, if I understood you correctly that based on the serial of this rifle and the fact that the barrel in this rifle dates to 1917 and does not have a rifle serial on it you would assume this barrel was replaced and the whole rifle is in * configuration. As a result to this you also assume the stock is not the original stock to it since it doesn't have a * mark on the butt. Did I understand this correctly?

In my opinion, based on the fact that this rifle carries the original matching numbers bolt, has no * on the receiver nor on the bolt it would had left factory as non-* rifle. Therefore the stock is correct to this rifle. Since the order was given on 21st December 1916 it surely could had been the case that this rifle for example was made on 1st January 1917 and still be a non-* rifle and correct as pictured.

It would make no sense for a relieved barrel to be used with a short lug bolt if it was in service.

Exactly this is what Skennerton mentions had been the case with the transitional rifles. Read it yourself.

[oldfoneguy]

It couldn't be a 1917 build based on the serial number, a physical impossibility. Believe whatever you want your entitled to. Winchester produced 225,008 p14 rifles with production ceasing April 1917 upon Americas entrance into WWI. How is it even possible that they only achieved the 93,000 serial number range between April '16 and January '17 and managed to produce another 128,000 rifles between January and April?

You know what You are more correct than I, how dare anyone question your expertise on this subject. After all you read A book. The fact is you have an incredible, immaculate, untouched, virgin of a 106 year old rifle that was never fired and lived in a vacuum until you bought it. How lucky you are, shrewd buy. In fact if I were you I would re-vacuum seal that incredibly rare exceptional example of a rifle the British didn't want and never fielded in combat and plan on retiring with the funds it will bring if you ever decide to sell it. Good luck, good bye.

[bros]

Bolt is stamped on the underside, "W", so it appears a factory original bolt and not a replacement.

Well the discussion of this rifle has certainly got the blood pressures up of some of our good members here.......well at least all the work of figuring out how to post pictures etc., was not done in vain.....it seems to have been the hot topic of the day to which I'm grateful for. LOL.
Guys I thank you all for your input and it's not always easy trying to figure the in's and out's of old collectible rifles especially when everyone thinks they have the million dollar rifle only to be told by another it's worth only two bucks.
I understand that's not the case here......I didn't think this rifle was a million dollar rifle nor was I told it was only worth two bucks......let's get that straight!!

Oldfoneguy I felt that I was part recipient of your rant today that was directed at Promo as I believe you were responding to his previous post, you were referring to the the rifle owner and that's me not Promo that's me Bros. Anyhow that's fine takes a bit more than that to get my hackles standing up. I don't think Promo and certainly I meant no disrespect to you in our respective discussions with you regarding this particular rifle. You refer to "because you read it in a book" well speaking for myself books are the only means of research I have other than the Net but anybody can post anything they want on there, books at least.... we can be quite certain that the author would have made a fairly comprehensive study on the subject otherwise what would be the point. Anyhow I certainly learned a few things from this thread.

I also put my foot in my mouth a few times especially questioning Stratton's interpretation of the Maltese cross and that's a bit still unclear but late last night I read parts of Skennerton's book on the US Enfield and his mirror's Stratton's interpretation, that it refers to "emergency use only". I'm still wondering why in the same war the Maltese Cross was used in the rifle building/re-building process with entirely different meanings and I know that newly manufactured Long Branch produced snipers left the factory with the stamp of the Maltese Cross indicating the use of "nonstandard parts", in this case a Savage manufactured rear sight on a Long Branch sniper rifle, that certainly has an entirely different meaning than "emergency use only".

Anyhow one of the main things questions I was trying to have answered in this thread was "once a MK1 rifle left the factory did it always stay a MK1 or in the Weedon process were MK1 rifles upgraded to MK1* as well......I think it's safe to say that during the Weedon process rifle's were not upgraded to MK1*........but I'm going to re-read all the posts just to make sure I've got that right so don't hit me over the head with the hammer just yet!!!!!

A well respected member here also told me that Melvin Johnson who made the 1941 Johnson rifle re-barreled a whole pile of P14 rifles and if memory serves me correct they are stamped on the breech.....possibly underneath with a "J A C" stamp I believe.....I will check that out in due time, but that's a topic for a different day.

[Promo]

It couldn't be a 1917 build based on the serial number, a physical impossibility. Believe whatever you want your entitled to. Winchester produced 225,008 p14 rifles with production ceasing April 1917 upon Americas entrance into WWI. How is it even possible that they only achieved the 93,000 serial number range between April '16 and January '17 and managed to produce another 128,000 rifles between January and April?

Have you ever heard of manufacturing ramp-up? I wouldn't call it impossible. By the way, total Winchester production was 235.448 rifle (225.008 plus 10.440 rifles without bayonet) which are officially listed per End of July 1917 - this is when production ceased, not April. Anyway, it seems there are charts available of how many rifles British inspectors accepted. I found online sources originating from the "Record of US Deliveries" in the Ministry of Munitions Series that WRA P.14 serial 91.532 was accepted in week ending 6th January 1917. This serial is very close to the OP rifle.

You know what You are more correct than I, how dare anyone question your expertise on this subject. After all you read A book. The fact is you have an incredible, immaculate, untouched, virgin of a 106 year old rifle that was never fired and lived in a vacuum until you bought it. How lucky you are, shrewd buy. In fact if I were you I would re-vacuum seal that incredibly rare exceptional example of a rifle the British didn't want and never fielded in combat and plan on retiring with the funds it will bring if you ever decide to sell it. Good luck, good bye.

Neither it is my rifle nor do I see any reason for you to write in such a manner. It seems you were running out of arguments since you do not answer any statements but prefer to personally attack. If you see yourself superior to Skennerton and his books it would be great however if you could give reasons to your statements as well.

[bros]

Took action out of stock in case I may have missed something. No serial on barrel, it is a replacement!! As well did not see the "J A C" stamp on the breech as well.

Both hand-guards had the "W" stamp on the inside so that was nice to see!!