Why doesnt my M1917 Bayo fit on my M1917??

[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.

[browningautorifle]

He needs to take it apart and show us some pics.

[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.

[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

[ssgross]

From butt to muzzle, mine measures the same 46+3/8. My rifle still has an "R" stamped on the tip of the wood, although the rifle is Winchester.

The rear handgaurd ring sits pretty far back, right up against the lettering.
Attachment 121092
To test if your barrel was cut back or turned back, measure from the receiver, as in the photo below, to the muzzle. Mine measures 26+7/8.
Attachment 121091

Re-crowning could be a simple as just shaving back to remove any nicks etc., or a counterboring and/or cutting back to get rid of wear or cleaning rod damage, etc., or anywhere in between.

If you have your heart set on bayonet fighting, easiest fix is to just set back the front band. Very easy to do with a sharp chisel. Wrap a piece of tape around where you want it to end up, tap your chisel in along the edge of the tape, perpendicular to the wood, then shave back the shoulder. repeat both steps until the new shoulder is nice and square, and the longer "lip" is the right depth. Then file it down to the right length. I would shoot it first to make sure it warrants the extra work.

it's been 6+ months since I shot mine...Thanks! Now that I have it out of safe...

EDIT: looks like your handgaurds + rear ring are different than mine and 72_usmc's, and your barrel has been turned back or re-threaded as some of the markings are cut off, e.g. "18 tonnes per...".

[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]

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?

[browningautorifle]

I shorten the stock and upper handguard

That'll never work out. Just hunt down a decent barrel and send it to Chuckindenver for changing. He won't leave any marks either when he does it. https://www.milsurps.com/member.php?u=5812

If you post a WTB hereabouts in the correct forum someone may hand you a barrel too. Maybe Chuck has one...

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

No, they don't do that.