A very interesting US Model 1917 Rifle from WWI

[rob63]

I recently visited the Springfield Armory museum, and they currently have a special display of weapons from WWI. The weapons in the display were collected in Europe by the US Army's Ordnance Department Historical Section at the close of the war. The descriptions on the tags were written by Captain Aney, the leader of the effort, at that time. I thought this Model 1917 "Enfield" was especially interesting. If I had seen it at a gun show I would have made fun of "Bubba" for doing something so ridiculous.

 

[ru44mag]

Thanks for sharing. You are right, that is very interesting. I can't even imagine how loud that would be, down in the trenches. My grandfather fought during "The Great War".

 

[indy1919a4]

Now that rascal is short,, That is very cool. So much weapons development gets brushed aside by History... They cut down 1917s over in The China Burma area during WWII for the smaller sized Chinese fighters the US & Allies were supplying.. They cut about 4 inches off of these..

 

[T.Lex]

Thanks for sharing.

I kinda wonder why they even put the front sight back on.

 

[Wolfhound]

Very interesting. Thanks for posting that. I find it amazing they did such a professional looking job cutting that rifle back in the field.

 

[Alamo]

. I can't even imagine how loud that would be, ....

Plus it probably had a heckuva fireball. Even if you didn't hit the enemy with the bullet, you'd set fire to him.

 

[Ark]

I believe they used those for field dentistry when no qualified personnel were available.

 

[rob63]

Thanks for sharing.

I kinda wonder why they even put the front sight back on.

I hadn't really given it any thought before, but I wonder where it would hit relative to the sights with the alterations? Obviously, they probably weren't too worried about hitting anything at any distance anyway, but it seems like it surely messed up the geometry.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I hadn't really given it any thought before, but I wonder where it would hit relative to the sights with the alterations? Obviously, they probably weren't too worried about hitting anything at any distance anyway, but it seems like it surely messed up the geometry.

Wouldn't it just be off* by the amount of taper in the barrel? Granted it's a much shorter sight radius. Might be close enough at short ranges?

*should shoot low since the front sight would be taller by the amount of the increase of the taper.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Plus it probably had a heckuva fireball. Even if you didn't hit the enemy with the bullet, you'd set fire to him.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Oh and I would SO shoot that 1917.

 

[Trigger Time]

The precursor to the modern sbr

 

[rob63]

Wouldn't it just be off* by the amount of taper in the barrel? Granted it's a much shorter sight radius. Might be close enough at short ranges?

*should shoot low since the front sight would be taller by the amount of the increase of the taper.

Not necessarily, you are assuming that the sights were originally parallel to the barrel and that the taper would be the only variable, but that is probably not the case. You have to remember that due to gravity the bullet does not fly in a straight path, which I'm sure you knew. Therefore, in order to hit a target at whatever distance the sights are set for, they must be set so that the barrel is not parallel to the line of sight to the target. I made a little diagram to illustrate it a little better, it is to an obviously exaggerated scale just to make it easier to visualize. Without measuring the height of the sights on the rifle and doing the math, I just don't really know how big of an impact it would really have, but I suspect it may be greater than is obvious at first. I am just OCD enough to actually do that, but, unfortunately, I no longer have a M1917. Also, just to be clear, my diagram shows the modified gun shooting short, I have no idea whether it would shoot long or short, I am just illustrating that it would no longer shoot to point of aim.

 

[Lanternman]

The difference probably wasn't applicable at trench warfare distances.

They would have had to change the inside radius of the sight mounting band as well to accommodate the slight taper. I bet the relationship to the bore was pretty much the same, and compensated for by adjusting the post height or the rear notch depth. Or they just raised the rear sight ...

Now the handgun version ... I doubt they were "aiming" at all. It just shows someone needed a handgun and wasn't issued one. Do you suppose they applied for FFL permission to manufacture a handgun on that one? It may have been the original concept for the flash-bang grenade. lol

 

[fender]

After reading all the written words and checking out the diagram. I had to go back to the cool picture.

 

[rob63]

After reading all the written words and checking out the diagram. I had to go back to the cool picture.

Well... I think the diagram is cool too, maybe not as good as the photos, but pretty darn cool nonetheless.

 

[Alamo]

.. Do you suppose they applied for FFL permission to manufacture a handgun on that one?

Probably not, since the wait time for the license would have been at least 50 years, I believe.