Too nice?? P14 on GB

[Rancho113]

Good morning all. This P14 is at auction on GunBroker. It looks like a real beauty, but I don't want to fall in love again and miss an obvious problem. Condition is everything and this one looks clean and original and would be a great addition next to my model of 1917's. But I would ask that your experienced eyes point out what I don't see. Thanks, Mark

WW1 Remington P14 British Excellent! like US 1917 : Curios & Relics at GunBroker.com

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.

[Promo]

Stock appears to be a M1917 stock which was inletted for the brass plate and some markings were added aswell. I've never seen the stock two times serialized to a a rifle, aswell neither in the brass plate nor right behind the triggerguard.

[Patrick Chadwick]

I agree with Promo's conclusions. But a short explanation of what is wrong is in order for newcomers to this type of rifle.
The stock marking looks like a homemade attempt at the proper marking, which would be a War Office arrow sitting on top of a circle that encloses IR over 1914. BTW, the 1914 is a type designation, NOT a manufacturing date. Proper production only got underway in 1916!
The P14 was originally made with volley sights, necessitating finger grooves much shorter that on the later M1917, the groove on the left side being shorter than the one on the right. This stock has the full-length grooves and no trace of the volley sight or even the plugged hole for the volley sight fixing/axle screw that remained when the volley sights were removed in later overhauls.
The stock disk looks like the kind of item that is sold for those who wish to fake up their Swedish Mauser and "optimize" the bore gauge measurement. The brass is simply too new, and has been inletted into the stock with the aid of a chisel, rather than with a router bit of the correct size.

It looks like a very nice piece of wood, but it is an M1917 stock, not a P14 stock. If you are looking for a shooter this may be a fine rifle, but do not get carried away and pay a collector's price for it.

As so often, buying and studying the right book beforehand - in this case, Charles Stratton's "The Pattern 1914 and US Model 1917 Rifles", which explains the above and many other fine points - can save you a lot of money.

[Patrick Chadwick]

this one looks clean and original

Always a danger sign. These rifles were made, issued and used in a colossal conflict; they were not made for the display cabinet or put straight into a strategic reserve. Every single P14 that I have seen up to now shows signs of an active service life. But maybe I am just unfortunate!

[Rancho113]

Thank you Patrick and Promo. I didn't know about the finger grooves being shorter for the volley sights. I do have Ferris' book on the 1917's and am getting better at spotting incorrect descriptions on those. I'll keep looking, and get a copy of Stratton's book in the mean time. Thanks for your help and for saving me some $$

[TonyE]

Actually very few Pattern '14 rifles were issued or used in WWI and most were put into reserve in 1916-17.

They were mostly refurbished just before WW2 to Weedon standard and then issued.

I agree completely with your comments about originality of this rifle though. Wrong stock, fake stock cartouche, no volley sights etc. A pity, because it is basically a very nice rifle.

Regards
TonyE

[sakorick]

No volley sights, wrong stock, phony cartouches and ....drum roll.....the bolt body has been pimp shined! 100% egregious. Regards, Rick.

[Brian Dick]

It's an obvious post WW1 rebuild that's been embellished as described already above. However, I've had several that were stocked in M1917 wood less the volley sights over the years and I'm not so sure I'd say they are incorrect. The later stocks were sanctioned for use if the stocks needed replacement. I'd guess it was surplused with the US M1917 wood fitted as rebuilt but I could be wrong.

[A square 10]

interesting how the photos 'just fail' to show the pertinent materil regarding markings with a couple glaring exceptions , the rear sight and bolt seem to match ,

[Patrick Chadwick]

The later stocks were sanctioned for use if the stocks needed replacement.

Can you cite a source for that? According to Stratton, P.14, "...To provide replacements, the firm of H. Morris & Co. manufactured 11,000 new stocks and handguard sets, the stocks not being inletted either for the volley sight dial plate or the buttstock marking disk...."

I.e. replacement stocks were available, but buttstock marking disks were out of fashion by then. This seems to make a replacement stock WITH disk de facto suspicious, regardless of the quality of the work (poor, in this case).

Furthermore: did P14s have the number stamped on the floorplate? Again, no mention in Stratton.

My cautious mind, hardened up by seeing innumerable fakes and forgeries, says that having the number stamped on stock, disk, and floorplate, is, to use an old-fashioned phrase "over-egging the pudding".

---------- Post added at 07:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:29 PM ----------

It's an obvious post WW1 rebuild that's been embellished as described already above. However, I've had several that were stocked in M1917 wood less the volley sights over the years and I'm not so sure I'd say they are incorrect. The later stocks were sanctioned for use if the stocks needed replacement. I'd guess it was surplused with the US M1917 wood fitted as rebuilt but I could be wrong.

Again, assuming my best cross-examining mode - for which I beg your understanding - this does not prove any more than that several people have refurbished P14s with M1917 stocks. Without a good source for "..sanctioned..." I am regretfully inclined to place this in the realm of hearsay statements that, if repeated often enough, come to be accepted as true.

---------- Post added at 07:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:36 PM ----------

interesting how the photos 'just fail' to show the pertinent materil regarding markings with a couple glaring exceptions , the rear sight and bolt seem to match ,

What a relief that someone else has noticed that! How often the photos on online auctions stop just behind the backsight, when a clear view of the backsight ladder and scaling would reveal whether it was for version x, y, or z, or maybe not even the correct backsight at all for that rifle! Or close up details of Enfields that show just about every detail except the markings on the buttstock ring, or the L.H. side of the action body on Mk4s! Or a cunning shot that shows all, up to the lower band, thus avoiding revealing that the fore-end has been shortened!