Which: Eddystone M1917 or Enfield No4 Mk1?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rockrivr1

Rockrivr1

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
1,873
Location
Massachusetts
Here's the deal. Same guy selling both, price is the same for either and I can only get one. Both in very good shape, strong rifling, good bore/crown and solid stock. Bolt cycles and loads properly and accuracy at 100 yards is similar. With all being equal which one would you want and why.

Option:

Eddystone M1917 in 30-06

or

Enfield No4 Mk1 in 303 British - Bolt face has a #1 on it.

I already have a Springfield 1903A3 and the Eddyfield reminds me of it a lot. I have a good amount of 30-06, but only 50rnds of 303. Will need to ramp up ammo if I go with the Enfield. That doesn't bother me all that much.

What's your choice and no, buying both is not an option. I wish it was.
 
Last edited:
Eddystone...

I've shot them both.

The 1917 was what most US WWWI troops carried.

The 1917 is stronger and is probably really more accurate. Ammunition would be easier to find for the 1917.
 
...

The 1917 is in essence our .30-'06 version of the 1914 British pattern that was designed to be better than the Lee Enfield.

I think the designers succeeded!
 
Kendal Black, if the P14 was better, why did they go with the No4 Enfield instead? During WW1 they just needed rifles fast, and found the P14 available.

OP, you can't go wrong with either model, but I'd want to check the headspace on both. That might be a deciding factor. The bolt head on the enfield being stamped "1" doesn't really matter, it's bolt setback that matters. Have either or both been rearsenaled? The enfield will be engraved FTR if it has, for Factory Thorough Repair.
 
Last edited:
The .303 Enfields all have excessive head space (to work better in muddy battlefields due to the weaker primary extraction.) As a result cases stretch alot and don't last but a few reloads.

Get the 1917.

Deaf
 
desidog said:
Kendal Black, if the P14 was better, why did they go with the No4 Enfield instead? During WW1 they just needed rifles fast, and found the P14 available.

...
Click to expand...

Institutional inertia, teething difficulties in the P14's adoption process, love of a tried and true weapon in the Lee, and the Lee's ten round magazine. Some may also find the Lee Enfield has a better "feel" to it and a slicker bolt. I note that the Brits used P14's for sniping because they shot straighter.

If there is a stronger service rifle action of the era than the P14/M1917 I do not know what it is.

I hardly think it is always true that military establishments choose a weapon for altogether sensible reasons. I think part of the reason for the No. 4 Lee Enfield is that a Lee Enfield looks decidedly British, while the P14 is not--well, it's not particularly handsome, looks vaguely German and was built for them by the bloody Yanks.
 
Last edited:
Rockrivr1

I would go with the Eddystone, especially if it's in as great as shape as you say it is.
 
At the gun shows around here, M1917 Enfields in good condition typically go for about $800. British No. 4's, $500 tops.

So, if you're looking for value (since the seller wants the same price) your choice should be easy.

There is one thing I would be careful about. In the case of an Eddystone M1917 specifically, check to see if it has been rebarreled. (Rebarrels, from WW2, are marked JA for Johnson Automatics or HS for High Standard.) Original WW1 barrels are OK. But some Eddystone receivers apparently cracked when they were rebarreled. The cracks are in the receiver rings and are very difficult to see. Winchesters or Remingtons don't have this problem.

No. 4's made in North America (by Savage or by Canada's Long Branch) are generally better quality than No. 4's made in the three British factories. They carry a modest premium in price.
 
If the stock is in good shape on the 1917 Enfield go for it. The stocks on those are worth a small fortune alone. Also, if you need a new barrel at some point, Criterion makes them and they are readily available.
 
Also, if you need a new barrel at some point, Criterion makes them and they are readily available.
Click to expand...

As I said above, be very careful when removing an original barrel from an Eddystone M1917. Those things are torqued on really hard. If you're going to scrap the barrel, it might be a good idea to relieve the barrel shoulder in a lathe before attempting to unscrew it. You risk a cracked receiver.

Realize also that a commercial barrel replacement ruins the collector value.
 
Some great information here. Thanks. I'm seeing both of them tomorrow and will gauge, but if they are both equal it sounds like the Eddystone is the way to go.
 
Given a choice between the two, I would choose the M1917 Eddystone. Both rifles are really built as fine battle rifles or like a brick sh.... well you get the idea. While I can't explain why, I have always been partial to the M1917 rifles. The Enfields also have a very strong following.

Ron
 
Go with the 30/06. Why mess around with a rather
hard to get round. The Brit' is a battle rifle pure
and simple while the U.S. Enfield can be used for big bore
target shooting.

Zeke
 
I've always had a sweet spot for the ol' SMLE, but if all things are equal, including cost, go with the Eddystone.
 
AlexanderA said:
As I said above, be very careful when removing an original barrel from an Eddystone M1917. Those things are torqued on really hard. If you're going to scrap the barrel, it might be a good idea to relieve the barrel shoulder in a lathe before attempting to unscrew it. You risk a cracked receiver.



Realize also that a commercial barrel replacement ruins the collector value.
Click to expand...



All valid points. I always look at firearms from a shooter's perspective and to Hell with collector's value as I am never selling it anyway. As such, worn barrels get replaced and sent to the scrap yard. Obviously, the end goals of a collector are considerably different and if that is what you are after then do not change it.
 
As I said above, be very careful when removing an original barrel from an Eddystone M1917. Those things are torqued on really hard
Click to expand...
Find a gunsmith who knows what he’s doing. The proper technique is to chuck the rifle in a lathe and cut a groove in the barrel, flush with the receiver ring, and then unscrew the barrel.
 
A No4 is not an SMLE. The No1 MkIII is an SMLE. The No1 MkIII was designed SMLE to differentiate it from the No1 MkI, MLE. Since the MkIII was shorter is was given the S in front of MLE for Short Magazine Lee Enfield. A No4 is, Rifle No4 Mk whatever.

Interesting useless fact. The 1907 bayonet used on the No1 MkIII was 17" long so that the tips of the bayonet on the MkI and MkIII would be at the same height when in formation.

Of the two I'd get the 1917. I missed my chance at a unmolested P14 a while back and still hate that I had let it go.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
Who's a fan of the Brit .303 No4 Mk1
2 3
Replies
70
Views
4K
mr tikka
M
T
  • Locked
Price Check on British Enfield SMLE No4 MK1
Replies
3
Views
1K
wizzegun
W
W
  • Locked
Eddystone M1917 Sporter
Replies
8
Views
3K
Jim Watson
J
U
  • Locked
Lee-Enfield No4 Mk1 info wanted
Replies
6
Views
1K
Limeyfellow
L
someguy2800
  • Locked
Enfield No4 mk1 front sight height above the bore?
Replies
5
Views
277
someguy2800
someguy2800
Back
Top