Krag Collectors Association Forum

I got to briefly chat with Paul, his Dad, and Paul's Son, at the Michigan show.
(Paul is a pretty 'snappy' dresser, with his floral Hawaiian shirt, shorts & sandals)!

I elected to wear new Levis, light-hikers, and a Kipling inspired brown 'T' Shirt, bearing the printed image of a hanging sign,
that features a Martini-Henry rifle and the words "Cross-Eyed Old Bitch Tavern - Rorke's Drift - Natal".

Heck, I remember when people went to gun shows in suits or at least 'business casual' and 1917 Enfields were priced at $35.

Saturday, there were a lot of Model of 1917 rifles at the show and most price tags were north of 1K. Nobody was even seriously looking at them.

I came home with a $12 book.

Since we are showing off Enfields, here is my dad's sporter. The stock is from a sporter that I purchased in the early 1980s. The barrel did have the bad spot in the chamber, so it was set back .2 inches and safety breached. My dad had shortened it to 24 inches. It was reblued and the scope mount was custom made from a block of steel. The fellow that did the original stock work broke off 3 drill bits in the stock and i found them in the process of straightening things out.

A note on the barrel internal dimensions. I checked the bore with a pin gauge and it measure .301 inches. The groove to land measurement (with an ID mike) was .306 inches which gives me a groove depth of .005 inches and a bore diameter of .311 inches.
Br had mentioned the barrel tightness as being legendary on the 1917s and I had read the same thing back then, so I used a part of blade to relieve the tightness.

My dad purchased this one for $7.00 in the early fifties I think. He mentioned having to clean off the cosmoline so it had never been in use. It was evidently built with a mix of surplus parts, Eddystone receiver and Remington barrel I think.

Once in an internet discussion with a guy who was a self-proclaimed expert, he mentioned two things I had never heard before:
1: That the 1917s were known to break their extractors, and 2: That many 1917s were issued to local troops back when the Philippines were a US possession. The local guys are not very big and the 1917 is a tad oversized, so that seemed like a bad idea. Has anyone heard either?

Never heard of all that. I'm sure a 1917 or two may have broke an extractor some time in history but everything I've read says the rifle was robust and tough as nails. The only complaint I have seen was about no windage adjustment in the rear sight.

1917 ejectors are prone to breakage. Lots of folks confuse ejector with extractor.

The Model 1917 ejector has an integral 'flat spring', that is prone to break.
The Ordnance Department came up with an easy fix, reshaping 'broken' ejectors to utilize a small coil-spring.

butlersrangers wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 1:50 pm I got to briefly chat with Paul, his Dad, and Paul's Son, at the Michigan show.
(Paul is a pretty 'snappy' dresser, with his floral Hawaiian shirt, shorts & sandals)!

I elected to wear new Levis, light-hikers, and a Kipling inspired brown 'T' Shirt, bearing the printed image of a hanging sign,
that features a Martini-Henry rifle and the words "Cross-Eyed Old Bitch Tavern - Rorke's Drift - Natal".

LOL You were quite snappily dressed too! I saw Rich first, and he told me "You can easily spot Chuck... just look for the guy in the ratty ole fisherman's hat boring the hell out of someone trying to sell stuff to someone else!"
Seriously though... it's ALWAYS a pleasure to see you Chuck. Maybe this spring, we should get together for some range time!

'Richard J.' is not the astute observer, that he thinks he is.
I was having a profound discussion, with a learned acquaintance, about U.S. Armory practices.
It was a 'display table', with only two well marked objects for sale. I would never depress a friend's table-sales and I think my 'Chinese Cadet Cap' is rather dashing!