These Enfields really weren't: this great English design was issued to U.S. troops in greater numbers than the venerable M1903

Guns Magazine, July, 2008 by Mike "Duke" Venturino

Most of us call them "Enfields" even those of us who know better. They were the US Model 1917 and the British Pattern 1914 made in the exact same factories and with the same tooling. Both rifles were designed "over there" by engineers at the Enfield facility in England, but each and every one of them was made "over here" by Winchester, Remington and a Remington subsidiary in Eddystone, Pennsylvania.

And both versions of those "Enfields" served their respective nations well in two world wars. Even more, they were a prime example of the manufacturing capability this nation once had because these rifles were produced in such quantity and quality it boggles the mind.

Both the Pattern 1914 and the M1917 resulted from an emergency when their respective countries declared war on Germany--Britain in 1914 and the United States in 1917. Both war declarations were reckless moves because neither nation had enough rifles. At least they didn't in the beginning, and one must be left wondering what either country would have done if not for the manufacturing might of American arms makers.

In 1914 Britain was right on the verge of switching military rifles from their No. 1 Mk III SMLE .303 (Short Magazine Lee Enfield) to the Pattern 1914. One of the features to be incorporated into the new rifle was a new military cartridge--a rimless .276 to replace the archaic rimmed .303. However, with the declaration of war the project was shelved and the British wisely decided to stick with their old "Smellys." But the new design was too good to waste so they contracted with American gun makers to put it into production, albeit and wisely as a .303.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Both Winchester and Remington accepted contracts for huge numbers of Pattern 1914s, and such were lucrative enough Remington even purchased the Eddystone factory to help. Production actually started early in 1916. By the time the United States became involved in April 1917, the combined production of Pattern 1914s amounted to more than 1,200,000 rifles in about 15 months. That figures to about 80,000 a month or about 2,667 rifles a day.

When the United States joined the fracas, the government immediately approached arms makers like Winchester and Remington with the idea of helping both Springfield Armory and Rock Island Arsenal produce US Model 1903 rifles. Some very intelligent and rational soul realized such a move would require completely new tooling and came up with an alternate plan. Why not just alter the Pattern 1914 slightly and chamber it for our .30-06? By summer of 1917 those three rifle manufacturing companies were going full tilt on this "new" rifle--the US Model 1917.

In none of my research sources have I been able to come up with a definite date when US Model 1917 production started nor the exact day it ended. In Us Infantry Weapons Of World War H, author Bruce Canfield states production "ceased early in 1919." He also states the exact number of M1917s made by Winchester, Remington and Eddystone amounted to 2,422,529. Think about those numbers. If we assign a production period of 20 months to the M1917, that's an average of 121,126 rifles a month, or an average of 4,038 per day from those three locations.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Brothers and sisters let me tell you something. Some of our gun companies today offer special runs of 5,000 of certain guns and feel lucky if they sell that many in a year. And some of them have to go to Japan to get those "special runs" made. They can't produce them domestically--at least at competitive prices.

As I said, the P14 and the M1917 were similar but not identical. Both types were 46.25" long with 26" barrels. The barrels were cut with 5-groove rifling with left hand twist rates of 1:10". Nominally the barrel groove diameter of the US version is .308", while the Brit's version is nominally .311 ". Using that word "nominal" again, the P14 is supposed to weigh 9 pounds, 6 ounces and the M1917 10 pounds even. In my collection are a Winchester-made P14 and both Remington- and Winchester-made M1917s. All weigh 10 pounds.

Magazine capacities of the two "Enfields" differ but actually are the same. (How's that for confusing?) The P14 .303 accepts the same 5-round stripper clips as the SMLE. The M1917, chambered for the rimless .30-06 actually holds six rounds. However, it was also built to accept the same 5-round clips as the M 1903.

Sights on P14s and M1917s are the same--but different. (Confused?) Standard front sight on both versions is a simple blade or post dovetailed onto a stud atop the barrel. Those front sight posts were supplied in 11 heights in .015" increments. Interestingly, the British had their front sight blades stamped as to height but the American ones were not, although the two types are exactly the same and completely interchangeable. By having all those front sight blades available, military armorers could sight each individual rifle in for a battle zero of 300 yards.

The rear sight on both P14s and M1917s is a gem, and had to have been designed by a rifleman. It actually consists of two peep sights. The standard battle sight has a .10" wide aperture supposedly zeroed for 300 yards. For extended ranges, a ladder is flipped up which contains another .10" aperture. Held in place by means of a spring clip, it can be elevated from distances of 200 to 1,650 yards. The only provision for windage adjustment is with the dovetailed front sight. Presumably, when the armorer fitted a sight blade on the rifle suitable for 300 yards, he also drifted it so windage was also set for 300 yards.