M1917 firing risk

[SkyHunter]

I recently inherited an Eddystone M1917 and am new to military surplus firearms. It was likely last fired in the early 1980's. I have cleaned it thoroughly, the bore looks good and I do not see any obvious issues with it. My first question is, do I have a gunsmith inspect it before using it or do I just go test it? Having read a number of posts here, it sounds like finding a gunsmith familiar with M1917s is not easy. My second question is, does anyone know of a good gunsmith in or near San Diego? So if I start using the rifle, I am wondering what the risks are. What can fail and can those failures create safety hazards. I've already got friends lining up that want to shoot my M1917 so I want to make sure its safe to use. Thanks in advance for your input.

Here is a picture of my M1917.

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.

[NRA]

have you broke it down and inspected under the wood line for any defects? It should be ok to shoot but just pick the friend you like least to fire it first, JK

[SkyHunter]

I guess "thoroughly" was not the correct phrase because I have not broken it down completely. I'll have to think about those friends,

[Patrick Chadwick]

Avoid all risk and give it to me.

Oh dear, that is geographically impractical, so I'll have to give you some advice after all...

1) By all means take it to a gunsmith. If he then just sticks in a no-go gauge and closes the bolt on it, then he has failed the test - not the rifle! The M1917 has a huge camming action, and can quite simply squeeze a no-go gauge down to fit the chamber without requiring much force on the bolt handle. This topic has been covered more than once before, hence the advice you will have found to only go to a gunsmith who knows how to check M1917s.

2) Use the simple method I have described more than once on these forums to make a head clearance check. The method described is quite accurate enough for a first evaluation to decide if the rifle is potentially usable - or hopeless.

3) Even if the dimensions are OK, please take a look over on the Lee Enfield forum for a drastic case of a rifle (search for "DP") that looked OK, but had a fatal flaw in that the chamber had been drilled through, to deactivate it, but the hole had not been spiked to close off the chamber. As a result, the bore looked fine but the rifle was dangerous.

4) Which leads us to the conclusion - to be on the safe side, you do indeed need to remove the barrelled action from the stock to check for such nasties. The worst rusting of barrels is typically just below the "waterline".

5) I have fired rifles with up to 50 thou (0.050") head clearance, and the only effect has been to ruin the cartridge case. Even if a case separates, you should not experience anything more unpleasant than a puff of gas. But to be safe, wear safety glasses for the first test with live ammo.

6) The real danger lies not in excess headspace, of which IMOH, far too much fuss is made, but in slam-fire or safety-off fire. Both of these are extremely hazardous and usally indicate that the rifle has been tampered with, and may be beyond economical repair. The method of checking this has also been described. And I have come across a rifle with safety-off fire (it was subsequently scrapped) so this is not an abstract danger.

7) Find someone at a local club who knows M1917s and can go through these tests with you !!!!

[CouldBeWorse]

I've put-off removing mine from the stock, because it shoots so well, and I heard that it was easy to assemble the handgaurds and barrel bands a tad wrong, putting pressure on the barrel.

When I first test-fired mine, I tied it to a tire with straps, and fired several rounds into a berm using a string. Then I looked over the casings for trouble signs. Also, you could wear shop goggles/glasses and leather work gloves for your first range trip.

[Capt Mil Coll]

Umm gee Ive fired all my milsurps after checking them out myself. I took some rifles to my gunsmith at first and he laughed at me. He told me if it has no overt obvious problems (loose bolt, missing parts, excessive rust, etc.) go ahead and shoot it.
I cant tell you to do that but thats what I do. The only problem I have ever had was with a M38 Mosin that had a small piece of copper fused to the chamber. It caused a split cartridge down the side. Took it back to where I bought it and he had the gunsmith ream the chamber out popped the copper. Problem solved. Good luck with your new rifle.

[OLDER THEN DIRT]

I have a 1917 & up to about a year ago, the last time it was shot was 1965 (47 years ago). I ran a bore snake through it & have over 200 rds through it. Got to say a very fine shooter. If it shot back in the day, it will shoot now.

[SkyHunter]

Thanks for the responses guys. I will update the post when I start using the rifle.

[fguffey]

"1) By all means take it to a gunsmith. If he then just sticks in a no-go gage and closes the bolt on it, then he has failed the test - not the rifle! The M1917 has a huge camming action, and can quite simply squeeze a no-go gage down to fit the chamber without requiring much force on the bolt handle. This topic has been covered more than once before, hence the advice you will have found to only go to a gunsmith who knows how to check M1917s"

I hear that all the time, camming action, lots of camming action, so much camming action the rifle can crush a no go-gage. I never hear from those giving advise the difference between a go-gage length chamber and a no go-gage. Those giving advise never mention minimum length and full length sized cases. It is always "HEAD SPACE" Head space this and head space that, my world is not complicated with phrases without meaning or understanding, I measure the length of the chamber from the bolt face to the shoulder of the chamber (DATUM).

CAMMING ACTION????? What is the difference in bolt advance between the 03 and M1917 after bolt lug engagement? Then compare the bolt advance of the M1917 with the Mauser type 98???

Back to the smith in Utah, he worked with a group of petty smiths, they accused him of stretching receivers (they did not accuse him of crushing no go-gages), they did not ask him how he checked the length of the chamber with a no go-gage, had he told them what he was doing in two days they would have forgot who taught/demonstrated a different technique and or method.


2) Use the simple method I have described more than once on these forums to make a head clearance check. The method described is quite accurate enough for a first evaluation to decide if the rifle is potentially usable - or hopeless.

Again, I have a M1917 with an addition .016" added between the bolt face and shoulder of the chamber. Back to the experiment with the 06, the shoulder of the chamber was moved forward .080", it was assumed the excessive length of the chamber with a shorter than chamber case would have incipient case head separation, when the trigger was pulled, nothing, the primer ignited, the bullet left the barrel and the shooter did not have a clue nor did he understand the events that followed the firing pin striking the primer. The shooter became a fire former, the shooter formed 30/06 modified +.080" cases. His cases shortened, they did not get longer, yes by all means take the rifle to a smith, the person in the experiment was a smith, a very often quoted smith, did I leave out the part about the smith that pulled the trigger did not have a clue why the case did not fail. (Or stretch between the case head and case body)

F. Guffey

[Chuckindenver]

1917s P14s, cock on closing, 1903,s cock on opening, 1903,s have a 3rd of the camming pressure then a 1917 or P14
1917s are known to have bolt set back do to heavy camming pressure,and years of use,
1917s are 3.5% nickle steel and only surface hardened, and actually are very soft, compared to the 1903, though they are strong.
to correctly check headspace on a 1917, remove the cocking assembly {firecontrol} remove the extractor, insert a No Go guage, close the bolt slowly and carefully, if the bolt closes but you feel resistance on the handle, it passes headspace, if it just flops down then it failed a No Go, switch to a feild reject, and do the same test.
if it fails the field reject, it has a headspace issue.
more then likely on a 1917 if it failes a Reject gauge, its from bolt setback..you can try a new bolt, and that may bring it back to spec, or and most common on early Winchesters, it has an over sized chamber, no bolt will fix this issue.
if you keep on shooting a 1917 or any cock on closing bolt action with bolt set back with a failed field reject, sooner or later you will have a case head failure.
before any 1917 is fired, you should look it over well, look for damage, clean the bore well, if its heavy with grease, take the rifle down, and clean the grease,
have the headspace checked by someone who has experiance with 1917s or small ring Mausers, as both headspace in the same way.