Head Space and the 1917

[RC20]

Agreed. Striker removed, very gently try on a field reject.

In almost all cases it will almost close 100% but a slight bit of resistance.

Safety has nothing to do with it.

[lyman]

Fguffey,


give this thread a read,

https://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?1103237-Check-your-M1917-s-for-safety-issues-Eddystones-especially

[fguffey]

Fguffey,


give this thread a read,


https://forums.gunboards.com/showthr...nes-especially

I could furnish a link that goes back to 1954, the author claims there were three M1917s, There was the Winchester, Remington and Eddystone. The author of the article described the Eddystone was like a box of chocolate, you never knew what you were getting. When building rifles the Eddystone was last on his list.

And then there was another article that placed all the blame on one smith and I thought all of the tacky talk started with the invention of the Internet. With my limited knowledge and ability I did a little research and found the smith taking all the heat was a genius that had a way with tools. So I applied his skills into some of the things I do.

F. Guffey

[JOHN COOK]

lyman, give up.... You can't win.

john in SC

[lyman]

lyman, give up.... You can't win.

john in SC

yep, I know,

but I can stir the pot just a bit,

and the info that CplNorton and his folks are finding is very enlightening

[fguffey]

Fguffey,


give this thread a read,

I gave the link a read, while reading through some of the responses I noticed responses from members that take themselves too seriously. the only M1917 receivers I have found to be cracked were Eddystons. I have never found a Winchester and or Remington with a suspect receiver. And then there is drilling, machining and tapping for threads.
there are folks that do that kind of work and then there are those that talk about it.

F. Guffey

[lyman]

I gave the link a read, while reading through some of the responses I noticed responses from members that take themselves too seriously. the only M1917 receivers I have found to be cracked were Eddystons. I have never found a Winchester and or Remington with a suspect receiver. And then there is drilling, machining and tapping for threads.
there are folks that do that kind of work and then there are those that talk about it.

F. Guffey

did you read the stuff CplNorton posted?

that was from Army documents, and interesting to read,


the other is chatter,

[RC20]

I gave the link a read, while reading through some of the responses I noticed responses from members that take themselves too seriously. the only M1917 receivers I have found to be cracked were Eddystons. I have never found a Winchester and or Remington with a suspect receiver. And then there is drilling, machining and tapping for threads.
there are folks that do that kind of work and then there are those that talk about it.

Chuck in Denver unlike you works on these and has done 100s of barrels on a 1917 . He found NO Eddystone cracked and a number of W and R.

Now I will take the word of someone who does this day in day out over someone who has an opinion.

[RC20]

did you read the stuff CplNorton posted?

that was from Army documents, and interesting to read,

I have read his material but it is out of context. Its historically interesting but does not track with other factual data.

I don't say throw it out, but its contradictory to whats been proven so there is more there than just the info.

Just writing things down or a record does not make it factual. That takes all the surrouning informaiton anbd it simpoly does not track.

A bit like that incident where the (5?) TBM Bombers off Florida went down in WWII. Factual they reported the sun was in the East not the West (or visa versa)

Actually they were so totally turned around (lost) they did not have a clue.

Factually an observer would have noted their compass heading and the sun was where it belonged, just not where they thought it should be.

[fguffey]

Chuck in Denver unlike you works on these and has done 100s of barrels on a 1917 . He found NO Eddystone cracked and a number of W and R.

Now I will take the word of someone who does this day in day out over someone who has an opinion.

There was 'before Chuck and there was before the Internet', I believe Chuck had an identity crises. Long before Chuck there was Weatherby and there was Roy Dunlap. In 1954 Roy published a gun smith type book. In that book he rated the Remington as the best receiver and then the Winchester, after that came the Eddystone. Roy said the Eddystone qualified as 'anyone's guess' it could be a keeper or it could be a piece of scrap metal.

Not necessary but I have a magneflux machine, to comes in handy, I went to a car parts type wrecking yard looking for 318 Dodge heads. They removed 9 heads before they found heads with only 3 cracks in each head. I replaced the seats and guides; without the magnaflus machine I would have made at least 5 trips while exchanging heads.

the only receivers I have found to have cracks are Eddystones, there are other resource types that have receivers that are cracked, all Eddystone. there is a Kentuckysmith that needed a Krag 1894 barrel, I sent him one.

And then one day a M1917 barrel shows up here, he said three smiths removed it from an Eddystone, he described the scene around the rifle as one that looked like three tire men removing a tubeless tire with out lube. That Eddystone receiver did not crack, that did not make it any easier to remove. The three smiths got to the point they did not care, it is not easy to look like you know what you are going when removing barrels from Eddystones.

When I remove a barrel I have had a few weak people pass out and I have had some strong types get dizzy,

When I installed the barrel from the Eddystone I had to modify the threads a pequeño bit .

F. Guffey

[fguffey]

When I installed the barrel from the Eddystone I had to modify the threads a pequeño bit

At the time I did not have a 308 Norma Magnum, so? I installed the M1917 barrel on a P14 receiver. I cut the chamber with one of those give-a-way reamers. The rifle worked so well I decided to install a 30/06 M1917 barrel on another P 14 receiver.

A smith/friend died just over a year ago, I went for a visit about the time he swore off of P14s; that was OK by me but I was curious as to why so I asked.

F. Guffey

[RC20]

And then one day a M1917 barrel shows up here, he said three smiths removed it from an Eddystone, he described the scene around the rifle as one that looked like three tire men removing a tubeless tire with out lube. That Eddystone receiver did not crack, that did not make it any easier to remove. The three smiths got to the point they did not care, it is not easy to look like you know what you are going when removing barrels from Eddystones.

If three people can't figure out how to cut a barrel for relief, then they are knuckle draggers not gun smiths.

Lot of here say vs someone who does the job day in day out.

[lyman]

If three people can't figure out how to cut a barrel for relief, then they are knuckle draggers not gun smiths.

Lot of here say vs someone who does the job day in day out.

not sure if the case, but I read that line in FGuffey's post as they wanted the barrel out intact, not just the receiver,

[fguffey]

not sure if the case, but I read that line in FGuffey's post as they wanted the barrel out intact, not just the receiver,

They wanted the receiver, they gave me the barrel. The smith that mailed the Barrel is in Colorado, he was in Kentucky. I do not know of a smith that has been working on M1917s that has not found a M1917 Eddystone with a cracked receiver. Roy Dunlap said the Eddystone is anyone's guess. He liked the Remington, he liked the Winchesters he said the Eddystone was not his first choice or his second choice.

F. Guffey

[fguffey]

I did not believe there would be a member on this forum that could imagine what it was like in the old days when changing tubeless tires. They did not have the tools, they did not have the instructions and they did not have the lube that was necessary. And then; once the tire was on the wheel there was the little problem of airing up the tire.

When it comes to removing barrels I insist on doing it without an audience; in the past I have had the weak pass out and the strong get dizzy.

F. Guffey