my current Lee Enfields ,Full bore

[dances with gophers]

"There is no such beast as a P17"

Oh yes there is! I bought one. Over here you get nothing else!

And when was the last time anyone referred to the "U.S. Model of 1917", as stamped on the P17 receivers?

"Love the fiddleback walnut in the Long Lee wood!"

Me too, even if those irritated by "P17" ought to protest against the non-official designation "Long Lee".

I can nit-pick with the best of them, if it is appropriate in cases of doubtful authenticity. Otherwise, I too prefer to enjoy the rifles.

So, dances with gophers - which is the best shooter?

I have to say the Us Model of 1917. :-) is the more accurate of the 2, nice tight grouping even with my tired ol eyes . maybe the P14 has had more lead down the Barrel, But then i havent fired them that much , I find it more relaxing shooting my .22 trainers.
and easier on the shoulder .

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[WarPig1976]

I have to say the Us Model of 1917. :-) is the more accurate of the 2,

Well, since they are basically identical the deciding factor must be the superior accuracy potential of the .03-06 round...

[Buccaneer]

I find it more relaxing shooting my .22 trainers and easier on the shoulder .[/QUOTE]

And in the UK a lot easier on the wallet..................

[Aussie48]

A quick question to the more knowledgeable, I just this week picked up a 310 Cadet, now it is immaculate in every sense of the word and looking at that fidddle back Walnut it is the same as my cadet. Was there an overabundance of very nice figured Walnut in the early 1920's as that is when the Cadet's were made for the Commonwealth of Australia this one being part of the Order of some 80,000. I have seen plenty here and have never spotted one with timber like this one.

Dick

[Bindi2]

I enjoy all my rifles (200+) starting with a Mk1 and wandering along to several No4 Mk2s including P13 and 14s but not a M17 as yet.
Which is the best shooter the No4Ts and L42 are very good but I think the No3T maybe the best but then I wouldn't stand in front of any of them at 1000yds.

[Ridolpho]

In the extreme case, Beerhunter, people get nervous about entering into a discussion for fear of being made to look silly over often cyptic and complex jargon. We all knew which rifle he was referring to just as we all knew there would be a reaction to the terminology. So far the focus of discussion of Dwg's rather nice collection has been jargon.

Dances with gophers: the MkV SMLE looks rather nice. Is it mainly original?

Ridolpho

[Beerhunter]

In the extreme case, Beerhunter, people get nervous about entering into a discussion for fear of being made to look silly over often cyptic and complex jargon. We all knew which rifle he was referring to just as we all knew there would be a reaction to the terminology. So far the focus of discussion of Dwg's rather nice collection has been jargon.

Forgive me but I did not react to the OP's post. My post was in answer to someone claiming that using the correct terminology doesn't matter. I think that it does and so does the British Army, e.g. "Today we had naming of parts."

[CINDERS]

Yep and I have a Titan ICBM in my backyard silo that goes along with the C-130 Gunship I have parked in my driveway I do have trouble with the neighbours when cracking off a 105mm round
Now I seem to have misplaced the 1,000 sniper T's I had under my bed....
Me I do not care what ya have just respect the person telling their story, as I am just about to do a Dr Strangelove outa of a B-52

[Bindi2]

Forgive me but I did not react to the OP's post. My post was in answer to someone claiming that using the correct terminology doesn't matter. I think that it does and so does the British Army, e.g. "Today we had naming of parts."

Makes life a little easier for all when the correct term is used. I am looking for a rifle from a group of 4 variations where less than 200 were built in total and 50% of one group may have destroyed or modified for another reason. The wrong discription would have me doing an 8,000km trip for nothing. I have bought some books and still rereading them. The correct term for the P14 Mks 1 &1*was changed to No3 Mks 1 & 1* still commonly called P14. The Model 1917 has always been that. The Brits went to quite a bit of trouble to make sure they were identified correctly when they were in service together no good sending the wrong ammo. Poor terminology in supply would have been fatal.

[Seaspriter]

I am so grateful for the extraordinary time, technical expertise, and dedication so many of the "league of masters" in the MilSurps community devote every day to helping the "amateur collector/restorer" community (this is me personified). There's not a day that goes by that I haven't learned from your insights, experience, knowledge, and trials/tragedies. Peter, Brian, Roger, Lee, Alan, and all the entourage from Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zeeland, and the US .... Thank you for your dedication.

I've learned from following lots of Enfield threads on this site that there are still many mysteries, contradictions, and anomalies that we have yet to unscramble...... to be an Enfield enthusiast you must have a strong tolerance for ambiguity, a very inquisitive nature coupled with an unceasing willingness to learn, a dose of humbleness, a love of history, and a sense of humor. Devoid of any of these, and your Enfield passion will diminish proportionately to your rising frustration.

As Ridolpho said so eloquently.

people get nervous about entering into a discussion for fear of being made to look silly over often cryptic and complex jargon.

I've learned there are basically 3 kinds of people that engage on this site: 1) the real experts (I don't qualify in this category and probably never will), 2) those seasoned enough to ask good questions and seek the wisdom of the masters (hopefully I'm in this category), and 3) the seekers who are sometimes early stage in their learning and sometimes very inarticulate and have not honed their insights well enough to be able to express what they need or want. It is this latter category that can, understandably, frustrate the experts with their seemingly inarticulate questions, misconceptions, differences between American and English designations, and transfer of terminology from one type of weapon to another. Enfields have their own unique language/terminology (like strikers versus firing pins, or chargers versus clips, etc.) which can get confusing if you also collect Colts, M-1s, Springfields or Winchesters. I have a pretty thick skin about being criticized for my many faux pas statements, but some new members aren't so equipped to handle a few verbal barbs. Let's keep perspective and "enlighten" those who misstep with an adroit sense of humour -- something I've found quite frequently among our members; there is a lot of wit here among the Lee Enfield community that is quite endearing.

Thanks again guys, this is unquestionably the best source I've ever found on gun collecting.

Robert