Why doesnt my M1917 Bayo fit on my M1917??

[1903Collector]

Attachment 121085Attachment 121085Attachment 121086Attachment 121087Thanks Marine! You have been very helpful. It is a great relief getting help. Here's the latest dope:
1) Note where your handguard band is relative to the bas port hole. Mine rests at the barrel/receiver joint about 3/8" further away...which is contrary to our theory that the barrel has been turned at the chamber end;
2) Inspecting the handguard band it is marked with a royal crown. Is the diameter of the receiver in that area of the P-14 slightly smaller than the M1917? Ive ordered an M1917 handguard band as well as a bayo band (the cross bolt hole was bunged up), so that should place the handguards back about 3/8".
3) The lower handguard has a "W" stamp inside but the sight groove is 2.5" long (Remington length) and the upper end does not look shortened, but there are some strange marks. The upper handguard does not look to be shortened either...to my eyes. How long are your handguards between bands?
4) The result after replacing the handguard band that sits back where it should is that the handguards end up 3/8" short of the end of the stock. The stock measures 42 1/4" long. The stock is clearly a new production. There is no grease or oil marks and no stain or finish on the wood under the lower band. If I take a chance and shorten the stock myself...problem solved...right!?!? Y E S, but the rifle and stock will be SHORT! It ight not be noticeable, but I ILL KNOW. Im a German-American Mechanical Design Engineer (or I was) and I would have to really work hard to forget. But at least the bayonet ill fit!
5) NOW...the barrel itself, per your theory, the barrel may have in fact been turned down. However Ive checked headspace and the bolt ONLY closes on "GO". The throat and muzzle both measure below 2. If turned down it is a remarkable job well done. Additionally, there are no marks in the barrel indicating it has ever been removed and reinstalled. And finally, it is fully British proofed (possibly in the RA plant), rated at 250 tons per I (I think it read "Inch" before the machining). There is a flaming bomb cartouche that would indicate US acceptance. The barrel profile also seems different from the few pics Ive seen of another M1917 barrel.

Conclusion: Ive no friggin' idea! The handguard locations is set by where the handguard ring butts up against the swell on the receiver. The barrel is not a factor in that regard. I have to think/hope the handguard ring is incorrect, or a P-14 ring, and the new ring will fit correctly and the handguards will set back 3/8". However, the end of the handguards will then be 3/8" short of the end of the stock. If I had the skill and nerve I could probably get an unaltered lower handguard, shorten my upper handguard and create a new bayo band inlet and shorten the very end of the stock the requisite 3/8" which then aligns everything...and the bayo will then FIT! HOWEVER, my stock is ALREADY 3/8" shorter than yours, so WTF! If the lower handguard were shortened then the explanation has to be that the barrel was shortened AND, coincidentally, a wrong handguard that was installed that would not over the receiver and locate in the correct position, which THEN forced the modification of the upper end of the lower handguard! This almost sounds contrived, but it explains everything and I am very doubtful that the stock length is larger then spec.

So, after all that Sherlock Holmsian sleuthing, what do you think? A quick check can be a comparison to determine if my lower handguard has been shortened. My lower handguard measures approx 9 5/8" between handguard and upper band edges, and my upper handguard measures the same between the lower band and bayo band edges. Also, my barrel is 25 1/8" from the shoulder to the end of the muzzle. Can you provide any measurements from your own rifle for comparison? Your help is greatly appreciated.

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.

[browningautorifle]

Note where your handguard band is relative to the bas port hole. Mine rests at the barrel/receiver joint about 3/8" further away...which is contrary to our theory that the barrel has been turned at the chamber end;

The barrel has had the back end turned down about two turns. Looks at the back end... How did they get that stamping of 18 Tons Per Square Inch there and half the marking is missing? Here's another to see. Chase your tail as much as you want, the breech end has been turned off to rechamber. Otherwise your chamber would swallow all the gauges you drop in. Of course there's no marks, if a guy knows what he's doing he won't damage your rifle.

[1903Collector]

Attachment 121085Attachment 121085Attachment 121086Attachment 121087Thanks Marine! You have been very helpful. It is a great relief getting help. Here's the latest dope:
1) Note where your handguard band is relative to the bas port hole. Mine rests at the barrel/receiver joint about 3/8" further away...which is contrary to our theory that the barrel has been turned at the chamber end;
2) Inspecting the handguard band it is marked with a royal crown. Is the diameter of the receiver in that area of the P-14 slightly smaller than the M1917? Ive ordered an M1917 handguard band as well as a bayo band (the cross bolt hole was bunged up), so that should place the handguards back about 3/8".
3) The lower handguard has a "W" stamp inside but the sight groove is 2.5" long (Remington length) and the upper end does not look shortened, but there are some strange marks. The upper handguard does not look to be shortened either...to my eyes. How long are your handguards between bands?
4) The result after replacing the handguard band that sits back where it should is that the handguards end up 3/8" short of the end of the stock. The stock measures 42 1/4" long. The stock is clearly a new production. There is no grease or oil marks and no stain or finish on the wood under the lower band. If I take a chance and shorten the stock myself...problem solved...right!?!? Y E S, but the rifle and stock will be SHORT! It ight not be noticeable, but I ILL KNOW. Im a German-American Mechanical Design Engineer (or I was) and I would have to really work hard to forget. But at least the bayonet ill fit!
5) NOW...the barrel itself, per your theory, the barrel may have in fact been turned down. However Ive checked headspace and the bolt ONLY closes on "GO". The throat and muzzle both measure below 2. If turned down it is a remarkable job well done. Additionally, there are no marks in the barrel indicating it has ever been removed and reinstalled. And finally, it is fully British proofed (possibly in the RA plant), rated at 250 tons per I (I think it read "Inch" before the machining). There is a flaming bomb cartouche that would indicate US acceptance. The barrel profile also seems different from the few pics Ive seen of another M1917 barrel.

Conclusion: Ive no friggin' idea! The handguard locations is set by where the handguard ring butts up against the swell on the receiver. The barrel is not a factor in that regard. I have to think/hope the handguard ring is incorrect, or a P-14 ring, and the new ring will fit correctly and the handguards will set back 3/8". However, the end of the handguards will then be 3/8" short of the end of the stock. If I had the skill and nerve I could probably get an unaltered lower handguard, shorten my upper handguard and create a new bayo band inlet and shorten the very end of the stock the requisite 3/8" which then aligns everything...and the bayo will then FIT! HOWEVER, my stock is ALREADY 3/8" shorter than yours, so WTF! If the lower handguard were shortened then the explanation has to be that the barrel was shortened AND, coincidentally, a wrong handguard that was installed that would not over the receiver and locate in the correct position, which THEN forced the modification of the upper end of the lower handguard! This almost sounds contrived, but it explains everything and I am very doubtful that the stock length is larger then spec.

So, after all that Sherlock Holmsian sleuthing, what do you think? A quick check can be a comparison to determine if my lower handguard has been shortened. My lower handguard measures approx 9 5/8" between handguard and upper band edges, and my upper handguard measures the same between the lower band and bayo band edges. Also, my barrel is 25 1/8" from the shoulder to the end of the muzzle. Can you provide any measurements from your own rifle for comparison? Your help is greatly appreciated.Attachment 121088Attachment 121089Attachment 121090

[72 usmc]

I think I have a Remington 30-06?, The eddy is a fat boy stock so best to compare Remington to Remington. I am not sure where it is so it will take a drive & maybe a day to find it. I forgot a good number of things from a stroke. The search is on Give me a day.

I am not a gun smith so I do not know what a reheadspaced barrel would measure if it was turned in by two threads> I like that idea. A work of gunsmith art and the rifle should be a great shooter. Is the bayonet that important? Keep that rifle for hunting or the range and then buy a nice safe queen that is intact. It reminds me of my grandfather's Winchester from WW I, in the late 1940s my dad got the rifle and his gunsmith buddy cut 1/2 " off the barrel, move the original sight back, and did a nice job, but he then dropped the action into a fancy Bishop stock. Shots fine, but looks funny if a military stock is put back on. No money for a new Sears rifle back in those days.... Who would have guessed it would become a $1000 rifle.

browningautorifle may also be able to help, he is the main man on this forum

[1903Collector]

THANKS, you guys are GREAT!

Sorry to hear of your stroke. Im about 7 years younger and other than a severe high blood pressure scare in 2019, typical issues addressed by 10 different meds, Im in good shape...knock-on-wood.

[72 usmc]

Found it and will post pic but I always have problems on this forum with pics. Lets see hoe it goes. My CMP $400 mix master rebuilt stamp M1917. Measurements Forward front hand guard wood to metal edge measured from the inside is exactly 10 inches long.

[1903Collector]

Attachment 121546Attachment 121547Attachment 121548Attachment 121549

So the wood stock length with a butt plate and front barrel band on the rifle. I laid a tape from the top of the butt plate straight down the stock till I got to the end with the W cartouche. I did not measure from the heal or the middle of the butt. I placed the end of the tape at the top of the butt plate and then went straight along the stock and under the bolt handle to the front end of the wood. The tape laid out nice and straight. This measurement of the stock on the rifle is 42 3/4 inches.
The total length of the M1917 rifle from the same spot on the butt plate & under the bolt handle so the tape is flat and laid out to the end of the barrel is 46 3/8 of an inch. See photo
does that help

Well, this story ends well as I just finished restoring my unscrupulously modified Remington M1917 to spec (still not as-issued as it has an Eddystone lower handguard, but at least the handguard is not modified!) I acquired, thru EB, a used but nearly pristine Remington barrel that was even closer to the date of manufacture of the rifle (based upon the serial number.) The guy even turned out to be "local" and I was able to fully check out the barrel before purchasing. I got a proper handguard ring and a nice looking used handguard (it even had similar wear characteristics as the rest of the wood!) and it all went together effortlessly (even the barrel change went well!)

So here it is, with bayo mounted and the offending parts replaced! THANKS GUYS FOR ALL YOUR HELP!

BACKGROUND TO THIS STORY FOR THOSE JUST HNOW READING IT:

I bought an M1917 a few years back and just now got around to checking it out and WHAM...it was unscrupulously modified. All my firearms are shooters, but Im a collector and have slings, bayonets, and accessories for each of my 87 long gun collection (WWI, WWII, & Cold War, so I had to have the proper bayonet mounted on it for my display. So I recently acquired an M1917 bayonet, tried to mount it on the rifle, and the muzzle ring would not go over the muzzle. When the handle was placed on fully the bottom of the bayonet muzzle ring was EXCACTLY in line with the top of the muzzle!

After some help with the guys here on this forum I sussed out that the barrel had been shortened by 3/8" (two turns) at the chamber end, the barrel turned down and rechambered. My guess is that it was a NOS barrel that someone tried to cut the headspace, cut too much, and ruined the barrel (Ive done it myself to a total of 4 '03 and A3 NOS barrels...I cringed each time thinking that I knew better!) Anyway, the owner at the time then put the modified barrel back on, found a unknown handguard ring that was too small, and would only fit to the seam between receiver and barrel. Then bubba-scam-artist cut the lower hand guard so that everything "fit" and to the casual observer looked like a normal M1917. The new headspace was good and the ME and TE were both under 1.5!

OK, so that resulted in a good shooter with lots of life left, albeit NOT to spec let alone "as-issued". To some, that might not have mattered, BUT the GB listing never mentioned ANYTHING about the modification! Now I confess that if I had done my homework and paid more attention I should have noticed that the rivets were missing on the far end of the lower handguard, but otherwise, it was a fake...a good fake, but a fake! I was devastated (last week was when I discovered all this.)

So, the moral of this story is that it is possible to acquire a decent M1917 these days...but it may take some effort and just a little additional cost! And as always...CAVEAT EMPTOR!

[72 usmc]

Total rifle length, so your measurement is 45 7/8 ", mine is 46 3/8 inch. You may have to remeasure so we are measuring from the same spots & manner. See photo for consistency in measuring method.
Total stock length, so your measurement is 42 3/8 ", mine is 42 3/4 inch. Likewise, be sure we measure from the same points. see photo.

So if you remeasure in the same manner from the same points what did you get?

[72 usmc]

C S Ferris in the book United States Rifle Model of 1917, 2004 on page 65, the start of Chapter 6, Differences in the Model 1917 indicates 11 rifles in the authors collection ..." standing vertically side by side in a rack, appeared to be of slightly different lengths..." the rifle had parts that did not interchange and he goes on in chapter 6. The rifle show providing my measurements is the Eddy with all original parts & cartouches. It has a rebuild cartouche.
the book offers no specifications table of barrel and stock measurements.

[1903Collector]

same same. Can you advise me the length between band edges of your upper and lower handguards? I suspect my lower handguard has been shortened due to use of the wrong handguard band.
Stupid question...are the P14 and M1917 stocks the same overall measurements?

---------- Post added at 10:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:30 AM ----------

Well, this is unfortunate. Either I replace the barrel and lower handguard, or I shorten the stock and upper handguard and replace the lower handguard and live with a non-standard rifle! Bummer!

---------- Post added at 10:37 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:35 AM ----------

Well, this is unfortunate, but your conclusions are unavoidable. Either I replace the barrel and lower handguard, or I shorten the stock and upper handguard and replace the lower handguard and live with a non-standard rifle! Bummer!

I think I already know the answer, but is there any history of barrels being shortened in this way by an armory?