Home Main Category General Firearms

What do I do with THIS junk?

BigslugBigslug Senior MemberPosts: 8,258 Senior Member
So, I've got one of THESE:



. . .and stumbled over this thing:



. . .and found some of this laying around:



Oh whatever shall I do? :wink:
WWJMBD?

"Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
«1

Replies

  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 23,989 Senior Member
    Send it to me. That's what you do.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 16,128 Senior Member
    Scrap it! Just a bunch of old parts.
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    Is that for a .375 H&H?
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • waipapa13waipapa13 Senior Member Posts: 838 Senior Member
    Is that a p14 or 17?, either way you're well on the path of a classic safari rifle, very, very cool.......ahem, I mean, scrap that old junk, ancient metallurgy, radiused lugs mumble mumble, I 'spose I could take it off your hands, as a favour.
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 8,258 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    Send it to me. That's what you do.

    This is in no small part YOUR fault, you know?
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 8,258 Senior Member
    waipapa13 wrote: »
    Is that a p14 or 17?

    Winchester 1917. Friend told another friend that I was looking for a donor action and came up with one that already had the ears chopped off. Gonna end up radiused for 700 bases as that's what my 'smith is set up to do.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 8,258 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    Is that for a .375 H&H?

    Well, I was gonna have the bolt face stepped down for .22 Short and the mag well filled in to take Beretta 950 mags. . .:jester:

    Original plan years ago was to go .375 H&H A.I., but started casting and ended up with with a .416 Rigby to cover the top end, so opted to stay with the stock chamber specs.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • earlyearly Senior Member Posts: 4,950 Senior Member
    Guess you'll need some wood.
    My thoughts are generally clear. My typing, not so much.
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 8,258 Senior Member
    early wrote: »
    Guess you'll need some wood.

    Yeah. . .I've been looking at online walnut blank porn. The production of this thing will likely end up involving quite the cast. The guy who's been building target rifles for me for 20+ years will be doing the action and barrel fitting for the simple reason I've got a boatload of trust built up there. . .but I've got to figure out barrel diameters at the sight and sling band locations, who's installing the sights, who's making the stock etc...

    Ain't likely to get done soon...
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • earlyearly Senior Member Posts: 4,950 Senior Member
    If I'm remembering right, I think I saw a variation of them 1917s that had about the coolest most robust rear sight I ever saw. It was a solid rectangle of steel with an aperture in the center. Moved on a long screw for elevation. Don't see one with your junk. Probly rare, but I can't recall.
    My thoughts are generally clear. My typing, not so much.
  • jaywaptijaywapti Senior Member Posts: 4,958 Senior Member
    What are ya gonna use for a trigger ?? Has it been converted to cock on opening ? if your going to convert it , I suggest you get a copy of Roy Dunlap's "gunsmithing " as his method has proven to be the best and safest way of doing it. From my own experience if you shorten the striker to less than 3/8" you might have inconstant ignition. looking at your floorplate , your going to a 5 shot mag

    JAY
    THE DEFINITION OF GUN CONTROL IS HITTING THE TARGET WITH YOUR FIRST SHOT
  • jaywaptijaywapti Senior Member Posts: 4,958 Senior Member
    early wrote: »
    If I'm remembering right, I think I saw a variation of them 1917s that had about the coolest most robust rear sight I ever saw. It was a solid rectangle of steel with an aperture in the center. Moved on a long screw for elevation. Don't see one with your junk. Probly rare, but I can't recall.

    Marble-Goss sight ????

    JAY
    THE DEFINITION OF GUN CONTROL IS HITTING THE TARGET WITH YOUR FIRST SHOT
  • earlyearly Senior Member Posts: 4,950 Senior Member
    jaywapti wrote: »
    Marble-Goss sight ????

    JAY

    I don't know. What ever sight it was, the rifle was issued with them.
    My thoughts are generally clear. My typing, not so much.
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 8,258 Senior Member
    jaywapti wrote: »
    What are ya gonna use for a trigger ?? Has it been converted to cock on opening ? if your going to convert it , I suggest you get a copy of Roy Dunlap's "gunsmithing " as his method has proven to be the best and safest way of doing it. From my own experience if you shorten the striker to less than 3/8" you might have inconstant ignition. looking at your floorplate , your going to a 5 shot mag

    JAY

    This rifle will NOT be converted to cock on open! Separating the efforts of cocking and extraction is one of the things I specifically LIKE about the action.

    Trigger might end up being a Huber Concepts, but I may just clean up the military two-stage. This one's reliably function first; fiddly, fussy target crap will not be in attendance.

    Yep. 5 rounds, I'm hoping.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • jaywaptijaywapti Senior Member Posts: 4,958 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    This rifle will NOT be converted to cock on open! .

    Smart man, I have a Paul Jaeger P-17 short trigger (5 round) , its one I had left over when I was building them in the 60s, its yours free if you want it , also I have a P-14 action, ears gone and its square bridge, drilled and tapped, plus extra parts.
    Shoot me a PM.

    JAY
    THE DEFINITION OF GUN CONTROL IS HITTING THE TARGET WITH YOUR FIRST SHOT
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 8,258 Senior Member
    jaywapti wrote: »
    Smart man, I have a Paul Jaeger P-17 short trigger (5 round) , its one I had left over when I was building them in the 60s, its yours free if you want it , also I have a P-14 action, ears gone and its square bridge, drilled and tapped, plus extra parts.
    Shoot me a PM.

    JAY

    Sent!:beer:
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    This rifle will NOT be converted to cock on open! Separating the efforts of cocking and extraction is one of the things I specifically LIKE about the action.

    Trigger might end up being a Huber Concepts, but I may just clean up the military two-stage. This one's reliably function first; fiddly, fussy target crap will not be in attendance.

    Yep. 5 rounds, I'm hoping.


    There was a guy at one of or Gun Club shoots a few years back that had a few African rifles, one being a Double rifle in 9.3 x 74 and another, a P-14 in .375 H&H and that one was still cock on closing. He told me he preferred cock on closing to cock on opening for a Dangerous Game Rifle. I can't remember what he told me. What are your reasons or what is your reason?

    Now that I'm thinking, I believe his reasoning was speed. He could operate the bolt faster or so he claimed. What's your reasoning?
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • jaywaptijaywapti Senior Member Posts: 4,958 Senior Member
    As I understand it, the Brits liked the cock on closing because the hot African sun would sometimes cause sticky extraction and they wanted all the force of the bolt to aid in extraction. It seems that Coridite (sp) when heated could/would cause higher pressure than modern powders.

    JAY
    THE DEFINITION OF GUN CONTROL IS HITTING THE TARGET WITH YOUR FIRST SHOT
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 8,258 Senior Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    There was a guy at one of or Gun Club shoots a few years back that had a few African rifles, one being a Double rifle in 9.3 x 74 and another, a P-14 in .375 H&H and that one was still cock on closing. He told me he preferred cock on closing to cock on opening for a Dangerous Game Rifle. I can't remember what he told me. What are your reasons or what is your reason?

    Now that I'm thinking, I believe his reasoning was speed. He could operate the bolt faster or so he claimed. What's your reasoning?

    They are very fast, and they do help get the chamber clear.

    Consider the Mauser '98 and all its assorted cock-on-close spawn: You need a certain amount of effort to break a sticky case loose from the chamber, while at the very same time trying to cam the firing pin spring back to the cocked position - all from a standing start.

    Now check out the Enfield: you not only have no additional strain to lift the bolt head, the two locking lugs are actually pitched as an interrupted thread so you are essentially screwing and unscrewing the bolt in and out of the receiver each time you lower or raise the handle. Result = massive power applied to unlocking and primary extraction.

    As to cocking the firing pin on close, you have a running start going forward, and in the last half inch or so of travel, the cocking piece snags the top of the trigger and gets pulled back - very speedy!

    I also like the safety. It's a simple rotating cylinder with a lug on it that grabs the firing pin and pulls it backwards about 1/8", locking the bolt closed in the process.

    A little tidbit often lost sight of - the cartridge originally intended for this action, which was supposed to be designated the P13, was the .276 Enfield, which according to my copy of COTW, was pitching 165 grains at 2880 fps, which would have been a real dominator at the time. The plan was to totally replace the SMLE, but events of 1914 intervened, the tooling got tweaked for .303.

    It's funny - numerous countries had studied and arrived at the conclusion - several times - that a 7mm projectile was the way to go for a service round, but been halted by outside influences. WWI stopped the Brits the first time; MacArthur insisted the Garand be .30-06 instead of .276 Pedersen to make use of existing stockpiles; the .280 British was essentially an early 7mm/08 that got squashed by the U.S. flexing its muscles to push the 7.62x51 / .308 Winchester.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • earlyearly Senior Member Posts: 4,950 Senior Member
    Its an Endfield rear sight.
    I'd post a link, but I'm all thumbs with this phone.
    My thoughts are generally clear. My typing, not so much.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    T
    Bigslug wrote: »
    They are very fast, and they do help get the chamber clear.

    Consider the Mauser '98 and all its assorted cock-on-close spawn: You need a certain amount of effort to break a sticky case loose from the chamber, while at the very same time trying to cam the firing pin spring back to the cocked position - all from a standing start.

    Now check out the Enfield: you not only have no additional strain to lift the bolt head, the two locking lugs are actually pitched as an interrupted thread so you are essentially screwing and unscrewing the bolt in and out of the receiver each time you lower or raise the handle. Result = massive power applied to unlocking and primary extraction.

    As to cocking the firing pin on close, you have a running start going forward, and in the last half inch or so of travel, the cocking piece snags the top of the trigger and gets pulled back - very speedy!

    I also like the safety. It's a simple rotating cylinder with a lug on it that grabs the firing pin and pulls it backwards about 1/8", locking the bolt closed in the process.

    A little tidbit often lost sight of - the cartridge originally intended for this action, which was supposed to be designated the P13, was the .276 Enfield, which according to my copy of COTW, was pitching 165 grains at 2880 fps, which would have been a real dominator at the time. The plan was to totally replace the SMLE, but events of 1914 intervened, the tooling got tweaked for .303.

    It's funny - numerous countries had studied and arrived at the conclusion - several times - that a 7mm projectile was the way to go for a service round, but been halted by outside influences. WWI stopped the Brits the first time; MacArthur insisted the Garand be .30-06 instead of .276 Pedersen to make use of existing stockpiles; the .280 British was essentially an early 7mm/08 that got squashed by the U.S. flexing its muscles to push the 7.62x51 / .308 Winchester.


    I realize MacArthur was thinking to get rid of existing stock piles but that should never have been good reasoning on cartridge development when you think about how more effective the Garand would have been had it held 10 rounds rather than 8 and how much faster and smoother it would have cycled with the shorter round and how much more accurate at longer range it could have possibly been with a higher BC 7mm Bullet. And we don't know but MacArthur might have been afflicted with the "Bigger is always Better" Syndrome.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • jaywaptijaywapti Senior Member Posts: 4,958 Senior Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    but MacArthur might have been afflicted with the "Bigger is always Better" Syndrome.

    All us old farts were afflicted with it, "The only substitute for cubic inch's is more cubic inch's" & your 300 Savage wont kill a deer as dead as my 06 will, and just wait till I get a 300 mag.
    Bigger has always been better

    JAY
    THE DEFINITION OF GUN CONTROL IS HITTING THE TARGET WITH YOUR FIRST SHOT
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    jaywapti wrote: »
    All us old farts were afflicted with it, "The only substitute for cubic inch's is more cubic inch's" & your 300 Savage wont kill a deer as dead as my 06 will, and just wait till I get a 300 mag.
    Bigger has always been better

    JAY

    Hey I know where you're coming from Jay, I've tended to be afflicted myself. I can hear my old auto mechanics teacher now, You want more HP bore and stroke that mill. Cubic Inches = HP

    And it did to a point back then. You had about 10K Voltage out of the coil, Fuel Injection was an exotic concept and there was no good means of analyzing the mixture going to the cylinders, it was sort of the stone age of automotive engines. You substituted Size for Technology. Not a real efficient means of powering your vehicle, But OH those old cars would still run!
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 8,258 Senior Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    T


    I realize MacArthur was thinking to get rid of existing stock piles but that should never have been good reasoning on cartridge development when you think about how more effective the Garand would have been had it held 10 rounds rather than 8 and how much faster and smoother it would have cycled with the shorter round and how much more accurate at longer range it could have possibly been with a higher BC 7mm Bullet. And we don't know but MacArthur might have been afflicted with the "Bigger is always Better" Syndrome.

    As one who works with guns in a bureaucracy, I can assure you that the man undoubtedly had some good reasons. It wasn't just the individual infantry rifles - there were all the perfectly serviceable and satisfactory .30-06 BAR's and machineguns in service all over the world, parts and trained armorers deployed with them, and a war looming on the horizon. As it was, we had to feed Carbines and Thompsons as well - injecting a second rifle caliber would not have helped defeat the Axis. We keep NOT replacing the M16 because nobody's come up with anything so sufficiently better to justify such a major shift in logistics.

    The sad truth is that you'll be in the middle of a war when you see the shortcomings of your current weapon, and those shortcomings have to be catastrophically bad to justify changing in the middle of hostilities. When you're not in the middle of a war, the sense of urgency to fix it is greatly diminished.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    As one who works with guns in a bureaucracy, I can assure you that the man undoubtedly had some good reasons. It wasn't just the individual infantry rifles - there were all the perfectly serviceable and satisfactory .30-06 BAR's and machineguns in service all over the world, parts and trained armorers deployed with them, and a war looming on the horizon. As it was, we had to feed Carbines and Thompsons as well - injecting a second rifle caliber would not have helped defeat the Axis. We keep NOT replacing the M16 because nobody's come up with anything so sufficiently better to justify such a major shift in logistics.

    The sad truth is that you'll be in the middle of a war when you see the shortcomings of your current weapon, and those shortcomings have to be catastrophically bad to justify changing in the middle of hostilities. When you're not in the middle of a war, the sense of urgency to fix it is greatly diminished.

    You're somewhat correct except for a couple of things, for one the Garand was already designed as a 7mm and ready to go to the production line and this was between wars. Also, the M-16 replaced the M-14 during Vietnam when the M-14 was already being carried in combat.

    AND I'm not knocking McArthur, I never referred to him as Dg Out Doug. Quite the opposite. I thought he was brave to the point of being a dare devil. But when he believed he was right there was no convincing him and few would try. I think the Garand would have been a bit more effective in the 7mm Pederson.

    After further research, it wasn't all about costs. The 276 Pedersen had other problems too. It was a lower pressure cartridge and shot about the same grain bullet as the .30-06 at a much lower MV. So it wasn't as good as it sounded.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • forty5forty5 New Member Posts: 15 New Member
    Have you figured out what you going to do with it yet?
    :yesno:
  • shushshush Senior Member Posts: 6,259 Senior Member
    early wrote: »
    Its an Endfield rear sight.
    I'd post a link, but I'm all thumbs with this phone.


    This Enfield?


    Lee-Enfield-No5-MkI-Up-POV-double.jpg


    Or this Enfield?


    1917_rearsight.jpg
  • earlyearly Senior Member Posts: 4,950 Senior Member
    shush wrote: »
    This Enfield?


    Lee-Enfield-No5-MkI-Up-POV-double.jpg


    Or this Enfield?


    1917_rearsight.jpg

    Top picture on the right. That has got to be the absolute coolest rear sight I've ever seen.
    My thoughts are generally clear. My typing, not so much.
  • shushshush Senior Member Posts: 6,259 Senior Member
    Rifle No. 4 Mk I.
  • jaywaptijaywapti Senior Member Posts: 4,958 Senior Member
    shush wrote: »
    This Enfield?


    Lee-Enfield-No5-MkI-Up-POV-double.jpg


    Or this Enfield?


    1917_rearsight.jpg

    I just happen to have one like the lower left, it came off a P-14
    they are really cool sights, I have to wonder how a shortened one would work on a DGR rifle instead of a 3 folding leaf sight, it could be calibrated for 50, 100, & 150 yds.

    JAY
    THE DEFINITION OF GUN CONTROL IS HITTING THE TARGET WITH YOUR FIRST SHOT
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement