Ditto if local bought unless agreed on before hand its as is. Receivers with different barrels should be carefully inspected and the deal should be an auto return at their expense if internet purchase if its cracked (that's a defective gun). You never know if someone did not get the stock tension right and blames the barrel. WWII replacement barrels should be good accuracy wise but opinion vary on the JA two grove. Early barrels on latter receivers more likely to be shot out than latter ones. I would stay away from guns that the barrel dates do not mach up with the receiver manufacture dates (and if a barrel change return if the receiver is cracked). SK makes a non drill type scope mount for the gun so if you can't shoot iron sights you have that ability. Not the real two stage exactly but good feel. On mine you then hit a spot if you are being careful you can feel the sear start to move. The trigger is interesting with a heavy long pull. Philippine Army was equipped with them (1917) just prior to WWII (just what the smaller Philiponos needed). Some interesting details are they saw a lot of action in WWII in the 1914 version as well as the 1917. The bolt is not nearly as smooth functioning as a 1903 (these are observations, not condemnations - they are solid guns, I just don't believe in myths} While fine for target shooting or hunting, I think the cock on close is slower by a lot than the standard Mauser operation. I know a guy who won matches with a glock because he trained himself hard.Īnother guy trained himself to shoot a Sig DA/SA even better as he used the DA function to start his trigger pull as he was coming out of the holster and had it ready to snap off as he came on target. Top kick in the Brit Army with 15 years training maybe could do that, but the average platoon would be no where close to that let aloen vs a average M1 equipped platoon. I did have one person contend that an SMLE could out shoot an M1 Garand (42 aimed shots a minutes). Frankly I don't think so, more an approach that no one could prove false as it had a great deal to do with the training and capability of an individual. I am exploring the myth of how much faster firing that was. There is also the odd Brit "cock on close" function. Likely very effective for someone who could shoot but was not a sniper. Offsetting that is the superior peep sight and a better sniper than the 1903 was (sans a scope). Interesting aspects are that that they are not as easily handled as the 1903s (both heavier and longer). You can negotiate a "return to sender" if it does not pass those. I think they will keep going up and how much depends on the attention factors it does or does not get.īarrel condition is going to determine if it will shoot and that's a hard one as most do not list TE (throat erosion and muzzle check) gauge condition (the usual its clean, rifling is strong but dirty etc). Value wise you never know what the interest will be and what triggers it (the various media attention which includes the internet now). Great stock with character and the cartouches it should have. Re parked after WWI and a good job and excellent condition. I now own one in the Remington version (mostly, it does have the expected mix of W and E parts though the bolt body is also R). I got intrigued by these when following a research trail I found that the Model of 1917 was by far the predominate service rifle issued in WWI. Commonly called the 1917 Enfield or even Pattern 1917 and a lot of other names.Ĭorrect would be US Model of 1917 Eddystone/Remington or Winchester mfg.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |