M1917 ammo, what gr bullet does your rifle like? PICTURES ADDED*****

0 Kudo

Forum Jump

Author	Comment
Smokepole50	M1917 ammo, what gr bullet does your rifle like? PICTURES ADDED*****	Lead	[-]
Posts: 1171 (08/25/08 07:04 PM) Veteran member Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Tags : None Well I am now the new owner of a Remington M1917 with 9-18 Rem. barrel. I am sure I paid to much for the rifle at auction but I just had a feeling it would be accurate and I WANTED it. Thanks be to God........it has turned out to be very accurate which helps lesson the pain in my wallet. It came with what I believe is an original sling and a nice original cleaning kit in the butt stock, a nice surprise. I took the rifle the same day to the home range and shot some Korean PS ammo and did well at 75 yards keeping 5 shots in just over a 1 inch group but I feel sure she will do better with Greek ammo. That being said I was wondering if these 1917's like heavier bullets. I have read that they do shoot well with 168gr ammo and also read that they were rifled with the same .311 reamers used on the P14. Has anyone here slugged their barred and measured the bore? One guys stated he got the best accuracy with .311 bullets??? Any load data or load suggestion you feel like offering will be appreciated. I think I am going to have to slug this barrel just to find out for myself if it is .308 or .311 I hopefully will be able to post some picture of her this week but please be kind when I tell you how much I paid. It is a very nice rifle and I keep telling myself the CMP guns are mostly shot out and sight unseen for $500 but still I think I paid to much. Smokepole50 Last Edited By: Smokepole50 08/26/08 02:10 PM. Edited 1 time.
Parashooter		#1	[-]
Posts: 1516 (08/25/08 08:03 PM) Veteran member Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	The P14 is rifled .303" x .313". The M1917 is .300" x .310". Both have allowable tolerances and grooves about .005" deep. The 1917 was designed for the .308" 150-grain bullet standard in the US .30 caliber 1906 cartridge in military use at the time. Reamers are used for final cutting of the bore, before rifling, and one would not expect a ".311 reamer" to be used on either a .300" or .303" bore. The rifling cutter establishes the grooves, not the reamer. If you do slug the barrel, note that you cannot measure a 5-groove slug using the same technique employed for slugs with an even number of grooves. If you are getting consistent 1.3 MOA groups with Korean M2 Ball ammo, don't expect anything else to improve much on that performance.
m1 talker		#2	[-]
Posts: 6045 (08/26/08 09:11 AM) Veteran member Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	All I can say is that the three of them I have pattern at 100 yards when shooting any boattailed bullets. With flat based bullets they group nicely. Curt
Smokepole50	Here are the pictures of my new toy..........	#3	[-]
Posts: 1172 (08/26/08 02:09 PM) Veteran member Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	I ended up paying $675.00 for this rifle at auction. I feel this is to much but she does shoot well and it is a nice rifle IMO. Maybe in a few years the price will not seem so high. Smokepole50
CDR Xfire		#4	[-]
Posts: 50 (08/26/08 03:37 PM) active member Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	m1 talker wrote: All I can say is that the three of them I have pattern at 100 yards when shooting any boattailed bullets. With flat based bullets they group nicely. Curt That's characteristic of the undersized bullets or over-sized bore, depending on how you want to look at it; and it is the reason that the British Mk VII cartridge remained a flat base, while the Mk VIII cartridge for machine gun use was a boattail. You can get a reasonably good idea of the groove diameter of a five groove barrel by wrapping the slug tightly with some thin shim stock, miking that and then subtracting twice the thickness of the shim. I only own one M1917 at present, and the original 5 groove barrel has a groove diameter of about .3105". This is the best it would do with a lot of very good M72 Match (173 grain .308 boattail): I noticed that Hornady makes a 174 grain FMJ boattail that is .3105", allegedly for the .303. Laughably too small for any .303 I have ever known, but seemed like it should be perfect for the M1917. Below, the Hornady .3105 BT fired at 100 yards prone, with 42 grains of surplus 4895: This was the first time firing with this rear sight, so the group was way low. Note: The internal dimensiopns of WW II replacement barrels should be expected to be within the allowable tolerances of the time, namely groove diameter .308" to .3095". All WW II barrels I have seen are two-groove, and the Johnsons (JA) tend to be on the tight side. Shooting over-sized jacketed bullets in a WW II barrel could get you into trouble. Resp'y, Bob S. USN Distinguished Marksman No. O-067 Last Edited By: CDR Xfire 08/26/08 03:41 PM. Edited 1 times.
m1 talker		#5	[-]
Posts: 6047 (08/26/08 04:39 PM) Veteran member Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Well, mine are all 1918 dated barrels, one Winchester and two Eddystones. And what yor targets show is exactly the same thing I get when I shoot boat tailed bullets versus flat based bullets out of all three of them. Curt
Smokepole50		#6	[-]
Posts: 1173 (08/26/08 09:56 PM) Veteran member Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Well...... I'll assume that since no one commented otherwise that I did in fact pay top dollar for this rifle. I know very little about these rifles other then a few articles I have read recently. I have seen a few for sale at our local gun shows, CMP rejects mostly, by shooter who bought 5 hoping to get a good one or collection of good shooters The rifle looks refinished or re-arsenaled but I am not sure which. In either case it appears it was done long ago and done correctly as there is no proud metal and all the wood fits tight. I knew the fellow whose auction it was and he had kept the rifles in storage covered in Rig for many years. Best I can tell it is all Remington except the bayonet lug and front band both having a W stamped on them. If you figure the original sling is worth $75.00 and the original nickel plated brass cleaning tube is worth at least $40.00 then I guess the price is a bit closer to what it should be for the rifle. Someone could have at least said nice rifle.......... Smokepole50
Bryan 45		#7	[-]
Posts: 2172 (08/27/08 06:23 AM) Host Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	NICE RIFLE! I don't know that you paid too much. It looks like the rifle is still blued, which adds value over a parked re-work. I haven't been following what Kerr slings bring, but I'm guessing that's another $50-100 right there. Thanks for sharing the pictures.
RichieRich3902		#8	[-]
Posts: 1269 (08/27/08 05:33 PM) Host Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	The 1917 was designed for the .308" 150-grain bullet standard in the US .30 caliber 1906 cartridge in military use at the time. Wouldn't that be the M1 ball with the 173 boat-tail projectile? Cowards die many times before their deaths; The valiant never taste of death but once. -William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar
mauserdoc	That would...	#9	[-]
Posts: 541 (08/28/08 03:06 AM) Veteran member Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	be a perfect rifle to sporterize if you hadn't paid so much--Would it be possible for big boy to take care of the extra wood on the front and D and T the old girl. As it is, if you got it in more practical condition, YOu would have more in it that it would take to buy a good new gun like a new remington! Well, to each their own. I've been looking for a p17 or o3 as a basis for a bambie buster, but they are either shot out or folks want an arm and a let for a 300$ rifle-- would be really cool with a red dot on top and maybe chop and recrown her. Are tactical sporter stock available for those guns--would look good with camo and the red dot.Nuff said. If you like antiques, that is a nice rifle. Btw, Sending you a PM-- MD
Smokepole50		#10	[-]
Posts: 1175 (08/28/08 08:06 AM) Veteran member Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	You really need to get some sleep MD................ He's just kidding folks. Smokepole50
Parashooter		#11	[-]
Posts: 1517 (08/28/08 09:58 AM) Veteran member Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	RichieRich3902 wrote: The 1917 was designed for the .308" 150-grain bullet standard in the US .30 caliber 1906 cartridge in military use at the time. Wouldn't that be the M1 ball with the 173 boat-tail projectile? No, the M1 ball cartridge wasn't adopted until 1925 - several years after the M1917 was designed and manufactured.
Colin		#12	[-]
Posts: 1678 (08/29/08 10:56 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	I'vwe had three 1017s, by chance all were Remingtons. All had the original barrels. None liked boattail bullets. The first was a wreck that came back from China. It had stood guard in the monsoon for years, fired lots of corrosive ammunition, and had no care whatsoever. I first shot it with loads using the 147 gr NATO boattail; it keyholed so bad at 100 yds that on some of the bullet imprints you could see the form of the crimping cannelure. I tried it with 220s and it shot better than I though possible for that barrel. It shot 180 gr flat based bullets well too. One of the others I wish they'd left alone: it has a 4 digit serial number, a Winchester barrel an Eddystoine stock and some other parts. On the stock is the "C" with broad arrow indicating Canadian service. When the Canadians rebuilt them for WW II, they blued them, instead of Parking them. I can't tell whether this or my other Remington shoots more acurately, so I kept them both. I put a British web sling on it and a black plastic oiler in the butt: I hope these are authentic for a Canadian 1917. These cautions about boattail bullets only apply to original WW I five groove, left hand twist barrels. Rifles rebarreled for WWII had 4 groove, right hand twist barrels and should shoot boattails OK.
m1 talker		#13	[-]
Posts: 6061 (08/30/08 09:38 AM) Veteran member Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Interesting post, Colin! I did not realize that the rebuilt rifles had four groove right hand twist barrels on them. All of the three I have are the five groove, left hand twist barrels, which would indicate that they are original. They also all have 1918 barrel dates right behind the front sight. But I have experimented with them for several years, trying to get them to shoot boat tailed bullets satisfactorily, and I always come away with dismal results. I have often thought it was the smaller bearing surface on the rifling that caused the boat tails not to stabalize as good as a flat based bullet. I recall a couple years ago, one of the bullet manufacturers announced a new bullet they were making that was a boat tailed .30 caliber bullet that was constructed so it had a longer bearing surface than a standard boat tail, but I have not heard anything on it since. I have always thought that if a person tried them and they shot better, that would confirm my suspicions about the bearing surface area versus accuracy. Curt
Colin		#14	[-]
Posts: 1680 (08/30/08 09:39 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	M1 talker; I, too, have long suspected that the longer bearing area of flat based bullets was what improved their acuracy in those WW I barrels with 5 groove, Enfield pattern (whatever that is) rifling. However, then I can't explain why 150 gr flat based bullets give good accuracy too. I haven't tried the 125s, but would be itnerested to see how they shoot in WWI barrels.