Watch this video on History of Weapons and War! www.weaponsandwar.tv/9-hole-reviews/videos/20260706-m1917-pa-7 CORRECTION: @blokeontherange has recently messaged me about the British doctrinal use of the Dial Sights, which I called Volley Sights on the P14 rifle (predecessor to the M1917). These are essentially extended range sights that officers would command their men to "area fire" at large groups of men at long range and NOT use as a substitution for MG suppression fire. Shot with M2 ball equivalent velocity 30-06 reloads using 155gr SMK. Sorry I forgot to put the info on the cartridge slide.
Have you guys tried recreating the m1 ball round. According to accounts it was a 173 fmjbt. It performed to good and was overshooting all of the militaries rifle ranges. So they created m2 ball to tone down the ballistics so it wouldn't over shoot the rifle ranges.
So, you made a mistake. Sgt. York was originally issued a 1917 but he did not like the peep sights so he swapped it for a 1903 as soon as he was able. His famous actions were actually done with a 1903.
WW1 ammunition wasn't M2 Ball. Or M1 Ball. It would have been M1906 Ball. 150gr flat-base spitzer, cupronickel jacket, at around 2700f/s as measured ~78 feet from the muzzle. M2 Ball is technically a 152gr flat-base spitzer with gilding-metal jacket at more like 2800f/s (well, 2740 at 26 yards, so corrects to nearly 2800 at the muzzle). M1 Ball was adopted post-WW1 based on disappointing experience with long-range fires, M2 just prior to the WW2 buildup. Lots of outfits, though, did their best to get their hands on as much M2AP as possible once in combat.
No, a Springfield Krag or 1903 was elegant! The 1917 "Enfield' is ugly, awkward, and HEAVY! I know, I own several of each! It was rugged, durable and accurate though!
You can still occasionally find 1917s harvesting moose in western Alaska villages. They were an issued rifle of Alaska guardsmen during WW2, and many remained in the villages long after their war service. These rifles aren't exactly heirloom quality, but most still shoot and .30-06 in the right hands can harvest anything walking in North America.
I have a "red band" lend lease returned 1917. They were used in WWII for home island defense and training. Some British armorer fine-tuned the trigger and it breaks like glass. Extremely accurate. That was my Dad's rifle in WWI.
@@dbmail545 Years ago I was at the range and next got me was a shooter with his match M1A getting ready for a contest. He was stunned to see the stock 1917 outshoot his rifle. Spoiler alert: I had made up match ammo for the 1917. There is a contributor to the 6mmBR site named German Salazar. Very experienced. He had a match 30-06 reamer made by Pacific Tool. ( 30-06 Serengeti Germán Salazar Chamber Reamer) The rifle with that chamber was better than his 308. The 308 being considered "better" by many likely boils down to the chamber dimensions and not "inherent" accuracy of the 308..
This is the rifle still in use TODAY by the Sirius Dog Sled Patrol which is a Danish Naval Unit in charge of patrolling costal Greenland. It is the only rifle that they tested that would reliably function in the extreme cold the temperatures they face.
Great job on telling Sgt. York's story Henry! I am a former seasonal interpreter that worked at the Sgt. York State Park in his tiny hometown of Pall Mall, Tennessee. He was given a nice two story house, paid for with donations from the American people. It still stands today thankfully! Some details I always shared when I told the story is the firefight began and ended with the best friends of both Sgt. York and Lt. Volmer being killed (Volmer was an acting major so he was even worse off with extra responsibilities but no extra pay). Sgt. York's best friend Murray Savage was tragically among the Americans killed at the beginning of the firefight by the German maxim gun. He is mentioned in the Sgt. York movie "as being cut in half," by the machinegun fire, but Savage was never fleshed out as a character, only mentioned in passing in the movie. The best explanation for why the Germans tried a bayonet charge I believe was they were paranoid about friendly fire, but yes, it is still strange they didn't attempt to return fire with their rifles. Perhaps they were too paranoid that they would also be picked off if they tried sticking their heads out, instead of simply charging down the hill as a group. They obviously didn't consider York had a 1911 as well as his rifle. The German leading that charge was Lt. Volmer's best friend, attempting a rescue. He was shot and mortally wounded by York's .45. Volmer believed there were more Americans in their rear so he wanted to cut his unit's losses and try to save his dying friend by surrendering. The other 7 surviving members of the American patrol were overlooked for commendations in my opinion, however York was rightfully chosen for honors because he snatched victory from the jaws of defeat by doing the most damage, (which also allowed the larger Meuse-Argonne offensive to break through German lines and sever a key railroad for German supplies, forcing them to withdraw), and also by managing to stay in command long enough for him and the surviving patrol members to find more Americans to turn over the German prisoners. This is already a long comment but I have one more interesting story to share about the 1903 Springfield vs 1917 rifle debate! My memory is a little foggy but while I was at the park, an interesting letter Sgt. York wrote to another Sergeant from the same division as him (1919 or 1920 dated?) turned up. York wrote to him asking if he still had that Springfield rifle, that was the one he did his shooting with. I am frustrated I forgot the Sergeant's name, but the museum curator did confirm this other sergeant was a gas casualty just before York's patrol would have moved out into the line. The scraps of evidence do suggest York may have had the chance to swap his 1917 for a 1903 Springfield while this other sergeant was being carried out of the line, but then the question becomes how did this other Sergeant get a 1903 for himself when their division all had model 1917s. I've shot both rifles live and I love them both, but the 1917 with it's extra pound of weight (9 and a half pounds vs 8 and 1/2 for the 1903) and wider butt plate make it much nicer to shoot than the 1903 with it's narrow butt plate. I bruised my shoulder the first time I shot an 1903, not so with the 1917. Great Video and thanks again for telling York's story!
Incredible supplementary material! Thank you so much for sharing this! Also of note, York turned out SEVERAL lucrative offers, and only accepted ones that helped the kids of his area he grew up in. He worked hard, even through the great depression, to stand up a school for the kids in the region (i think he even mortgaged his home, and nearly lost his farm; and the original company that gave the farm to him even stopped paying for it only after a few years). He also got kicked out of the school for petty political differences; yet he still donated to the school, which still stands today and is among the best high schools in the country. I’m so glad his life passion still perseveres to future generations.
From what I learned, and this was supposed to be from Alvin York's grandson, that he did infact trade for an 03 Springfield. York hated the sights on the Enfield. The Springfield had a notch sight much like his own rifle at home. In addition he trained with the Springfield in Boot camp.
My first hunting rifle when I was 12 was a sporterized Eddystone with a scope, many years ago I also acquired an Eddystone in original military configuration. I also have a sporterized 03 and an OG 03A3. I've shot them all quite a bit but I love the original military 1917, really a fun gun to shoot.
Othias is big guy. Plus he didn't have to go on a long march, like your typical 130lb doughboy, where that weight matters. Speaking of Othias, & C&Rsenal, I believe, the US lawfully licensed the 1903 design, from Mauser. Where they violated patents, was on the 06 ammo. Specifically the Spitzer bullet design. And they documented it, so it made the lawsuit easier. Watch the C&Rsenal 1903 video, to see if my old boomer brain, got it at least partially right.
The M-1917 saw a lot of use in Canada, we purchased 80,000 of them at the beginning of WW2, they were used for training, then passed on to the RCAF, and the Pacific Coast Militia Rangers. The PCMR loved them, as long as they were patrolling by boat. They found them a bit cumbersome in the forest, but appreciated their power.
According to Alvin Yorks son, he was told by Alvin that he swapped rifles with another soldier that had a 1903 because he preferred the sights. He even wrote in his diary that he hated the British sights.
I do think the controversy does come from the specific entry regarding his action because he simply wrote that he used “a rifle and a .45 Colt automatic pistol.” While the pistol is beyond doubt to be the M1911, the rifle itself wasn’t specified beyond “a rifle.”
My friend and I bought 2 P17's in the late 80's. They were in unfired condition and had orange paint dabbed on the woodwork, which I believe indicated that they were British Home Guard issue and 30/06 calibre. We both won numerous Military Comps with these fabulously accurate rifles. We noticed both rifles shot roughly 6" high regardless of distance. I read that this was deliberate as the Troops were trained to shoot using a 'belt' hold. Or maybe it was the 150g Military ball ammo we used. Unfortunately both rifles are now well sold but I will never forget what a joy they were to shoot. Great vid, thank you.
The clusterfuck of many different varied forms of complicated sight systems that the 1903 and 1917 had and went through were largely because of all the different ordnance officers involved had their own weird and wacky preferences for their target shooting competitions and wanted to force those onto the new service rifle after being dissatisfied with the krag and rolling block for competition usage. The 1903 went through something like 6 entirely different sight systems/patterns more than 8+ times before settling on the 1903 production pattern.
My 2nd deer rifle. While growing up in West Columbia I was given an Enfield 303 British, however I wanted a more powerful cartridge rifle,(don't know why as you're lucky to see 50 to 100 yards in the woods there) I swapped the Enfield for the 30-06 Springfield, as British .303 ammo was hard to find in the 70s S.E.Texas.30-06 was everywhere.
We sent a lot of 1917s to the British from existing stores. They issued them to the Home Guard, along with Thompsons and .30-06 Lewis Guns. That way they could arm the Home Guard to free up arms for the Army and keep the logistic chains for American calibers and British calibers separate.
I'm so glad that I have one of these rifles. Mine was lend leased and became a Danish Polar Defense Rifle, designated M53, and then came back home in the '90s as surplus. Dad bought it to have a deer rifle and thankfully he never sporterized it. My rifle is an Eddystone, that was never rebarreled.
As Hickok45 often points out, Alvin York was a proud son of Tennessee. The Boers were indirectly responsible for the 1917 Enfield. The British faced accurate and flat shooting 7x57 charger loaded '93 Mausers in the Boer War. After modifying the Long Lee Enfield to charger loading and shortening it to create the SMLE, they developed the .276 (7mm) cartridge and the Mauser derived P13. But for WWI, this could well have led to the demise of the .303 cartridge and the SMLE.
They had a bunch of developmental work to do with the .276. It was way too powerful (damn near a magnum) and burned up barrels. Funny how they encountered the 7x57 (round nose even) in the m93/95 Mauser which is such a light kicking flat sweet shooter and thought, “You know what this needs…Let’s hot rod the ever loving piss out of this and put it in a massively overbuilt rifle…”
The original British design was the P1913 and it was chambered in rimless .276 Enfield or the 7x60. The British were at the time trying to replace the 303 but WW1 got started before they could make the switch.
Which led to the creation of the P1914. Which is chambered in .303. However it was more so used as a sniper weapon and the SMLE was the standard issue rifle.
Hearing a former US Army officer excitedly describe a well over 100 year old Medal of Honor action, and getting even more excited that maybe it was with a good ole American Winchester, and that officer is an immigrant….? Man I love this country.
I visited the Alvin C. York state historic site several years ago. The rangers there at the time were very knowledgeable. When I asked the question about which rifle York used they knew where I was coming from with the question. According to them Alvin's son Andrew who had worked there before his passing insisted that his father never liked "that English rifle." That leads me to believe he used a Springfield.
My grandfather was a radio man in a 4.2" mortar battalion. He was issued A P-17 in basic and took it when he was shipped to the Pacific. He later was given an M-1 carbine.
Thank you. I have been waiting for this one. The shift in sighting mind set was very informative. I believe the P13/P14/M1917 was the first one that integrated a peep rear sight as standard, a concept that was used on most Western military rifles made after- BAR, the Thompson, Garand, Carbine and beyond. Awesome rifle! Thanks again.
I discovered the Model 1917 seven years ago and like Henry it is one of my favorite rifles. Also like Henry I pair it with the Colt 1911 that my great uncle carried in France in 1918. He was in the 89th infantry division at Staint Mihiel and then the Meuse-Argonne when the armistice ended operations. The 89th did occupation duty and uncle Frank finally came home in the summer of 1919.
I always remember reading about the war in Philippines after the Japanese conquest and the Filipino troops claiming that though the Enfield was heavier, it stood up to conditions that put the Springfield out of usability.
I also watched Victory at Sea growing up. My father had been a combat photographer in the Pacific during World War II. Sometimes while we were watching Victory at Sea, He would point out pictures, or films (he did both) that he had taken. I did not think anyone of your generation would have every seen Victory At Sea. I am glad you got to see it.
Love this! As a younger man I made the decision that I wanted to a WW1 American rifle to go with my WW2 Garand. After much research I decided to seek out a M1917. 8 months of see nearly no be available I happened on the one. It was in such great shape that I purchased it even though it was about $75 more than I was expecting to pay. Many years later when my first son became big enough to lift it, it became his favorite rifle, and the shooting/history bug was passed down to another generation.
My grandfather who grew up in rural Illinois, was with the 90th Infantry Division (Tough Ombres!) during WWI and carried an M1917. He always said he liked the M1917 and had only one complaint, it was one heavy sum-of-a-bitch! Later in life, his hunting rifle was a NRA sporterized M1903, "cuz I got it cheap" oh and his hunting shotgun was a rabbit eared LC Smith side by side in 12 Ga. No fancy pump gun like my dad used. Damn I miss them both. :(
Great video! A note about the M1917 in WW2. They were used in training stateside. IIRC it saw use with the Philippine Army in 1941-1942 as well as with Guerillas during the Japanese occupation. They were also supplied (ironically) to the British following Dunkirk to make up for an arms shortage. These can be identified with a red band marked .30-06 to differentiate them from P14s that were brought out at the same time. Additionally they were supplied in some quantity to Free French units in 1944.
They were also used by Alaska native guardsman during WW2 and the early stages of the Cold War. You can still find them in the homes of some older villagers, they do get passed down from son to son. They aren't pretty, Alaska's west coast will do that to you, but most of them still shoot and some still harvest critters.
Speaking of battle sights, the battle sight range on a 1903 Springfield was 547 yards. Which seems like an odd number. Until you do the math, and it comes out to 500 meters. Even back then, there was no avoiding the metric system!
I have a Winchester. Amazing rifle, greatly prefer it over the 1903. It was also the first , secondary, service rifle to out produce it's main counterpart.
Henry shooting at up to 500 yards with iron sights and still hitting with so few misses is almost superhuman! I have a lot of trouble shooting that accurate at a 100m let alone over 400m!
@@jason200912500yds was the easiest position during USMC quals, even with irons. Five minutes, five shots, from the prone. That is where you padded your score. That's no optics, and M16A1. Old Marine Corps, if you can see it, you can hit it.
Absolutely love my 1903A3... Don't shoot it too often, but it still gets the job done.. Thanks for the fantastic history lesson, and keep up the great work 👍
Henry, Thanks for the detailed explanation on your sight alignment issues / modified technique. It might be helpful information for dealing with larger apertured peep sights.
Proper sight alignment and having the muscle memory to hold the weapon *Perfectly* straight and level; trying to avoid the possibility of slightly canting them at all, is SUPER overlooked when discussing a weapon or shooters accuracy. ESPECIALLY the longer your sight radius is and when firing at extended ranges as by being more accurate, adjusting the zero and windage has a larger effect but requires less actual "adjusting" to do it meaning a slight misalignment can result in a massive point of aim and bloom your MOA. And obviously at long range where your target is smaller, and any sight adjustments effect is multiplied the further out the target is, proper alignment becomes exponentially more "that important". And that's just a properly zeroed sight by itself, not taking windage, bullet drift off too whichever direction its rifling twists due to the rotational force spinning the bullet, the slight curvature of the earth extreme long range sniping has to calculate for example, etc. And any errors in any of those calculations, will exponentially magnify accuracy issues from a user improperly aligning the sights even more.
If you have not already done so, I urge you to go out of your way and visit Pall Mall, Tennessee and see where Sgt Alvin York lived and is buried. His home, his grave, his church, his land, the humble community. And humble is the word. Everything he pursued in life before and after the war was for the betterment of his humble home and community on the Wolf River as a farming region. Beautiful place and his family general store makes a good hamburger.
Howdy Henry & Josh, you guys hit on a few of my historical soap box rants. No one likes unsolicited lunatic ramblings, but it’ll bother me if I don’t speak up haha The three things I want to touch on are: 1) The M1917 outnumbered the M1903… sort of 2) The movie might actually be right about York using a 1903 3) The controversy surrounding the story of York’s MoH 1) Yes, technically there were a lot more men with M1917s in France by the end of WWI, but this is misleading. The US made an effort to standardize arms within divisions to simplify logistics. The “regulars” in divisions 1-6 and the first three Nat’l Guard divisions deployed (26th, 32nd, 42nd) were equipped with the M1903. The rest of the NG (mostly) and the conscripts received M1917s. With roughly three dozen divisions sent to France before armistice (a few broken up for replacements), this shakes out to about 70% M1917s, 25% M1903s, and 5% under British command with SMLEs (27th & 30th). This falls apart a bit when you consider the timeline of US involvement. US infantry was first actively engaged in late October 1917, just over 12 months before armistice. It wasn’t until the 77th arrived in April 1918 that there was an M1917-equipped division in France. They’d first see action a few months later in June/July. This means the M1917 played no role in the first half of active US involvement on the Western Front, which is also why most of the propaganda posters don’t depict it. The M1903 continued to outnumber the M1917 in France until the 90th arrived in June. They would first see action in August. So the M1903 outnumbered the M1917 in the trenches for the first two-thirds of America’s involvement on the Western Front. In the last four months of the war, the bulk of the volunteers and conscripts poured in and the M1917 finally outnumbered the M1903. 2) York’s division, the 82nd not-yet-airborne, was a conscript division equipped with the M1917. In his diary he talks about training with an M1903, and then his unit later having them all replaced with M1917s. So the (very logical) conclusion is that he had an M1917, if not for a letter he wrote in 1920 to a friend where he says: “Say James do you remember that little Springfield rifle that you gave me as we went up to the front line. That is the rifle that I did my shooting with. I used it and my Colts [sic] pistol.” This letter is in the collection of the Alvin C. York Foundation. It was sent to Sgt. James Percy Cooper, who served in a medical detachment during the war. From what a volunteer with the Foundation told me, Cooper was assigned to (or just stationed adjacent to) York’s regiment. They met and became friends. York brought up his fondness for the M1903 he had in training. Cooper was in a unit that had M1903s, so he offered to trade rifles. That letter is the only hard evidence I’ve seen of this interaction, though. I have the pdf scan of the letter. Can find a way to send it to you if you're curious. I’m unsure how they determined what rifles to issue support units, but it seems unlikely they’d be different than the division they were attached to. The 82nd fought adjacent to the 1st and 42nd in the Meuse-Argonne, with the 2nd and 32nd also in the area. It’s possible Cooper was attached to one of those M1903-equipped divisions and they met during staging or something. The story is very farfetched, but the clear wording in the letter is difficult to brush aside. 3) In recent years there has been a push to collect the stories of the other men on York’s MoH patrol, and they paint a somewhat different picture of events. It is now believed that York’s actions may have been embellished somewhat (without his input) by the staff as a political move to help their careers. I highly recommend this lecture on the topic if you have an hour to spare: youtu.be/watch?v=vbxh2aivmgQ
Also I have one of the rare and adorable M1917 carbines cut down by Ishapore for the Chinese X-Force soldiers fighting in Burma. You're welcome to borrow it, although the rifling is quite... tired: youtu.be/watch?v=F-Qu3vltnRU
@@ALovelyBunchOfDragonballz You apparently did not continue reading. For most of the war, there were none in action. 70% is only a snapshot of the composition at the end of the war. Most of the divisions that used them during the war saw action in the last month at most. Some only for the last few days.
Pfc. York would have adjusted, and he would have had no problem using the M-17. He was sighting the weapon's limitations. Cool Story! When I checked many years ago, the .30-06 was the most prolific cartridge in the world. That was a couple of decades ago. I would live to see how the new .277 cartridge performs next to it.
Now im no expert, but from my experience of research (amateurly), i would say the 1903 was a better target rifle, while the 1917 Enfield was a better combat rifle. That being said, both performed admirably during the war and served the US well.
After World War II, the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force also used this rifle and a sniper rifle with a scope. They are displayed at the Weapons School of the Self-Defense Force.
I have got one of these rifles, Winchester production. I also have a couple of modern, more expensive rifles, but this old gun is by far my favorite. It often gets out on the range while my modern ones rarely see daylight.
Thanks for the video, I very much enjoyed the passion Henry has for history. Up here across the medicine line we saw both Pattern 14 as well as M1917 rifles for sale as surplus in the '60's - along with Mk III and No 4 Mk 1 LE rifles of course. Strangely enough, on the Pattern 14/M 1917 front, I can recall only seeing a handful of Winchester made rifles. We'd see about a 2:1 ratio of Eddystone to Remington made rifles I want to say, but that's going off a semi-old guy's memories from a long time ago. We also saw a bunch of the Pattern 14/M1917 rifles "sporterized" as well, many with the original barrels which shot amazingly well. All the best.
Fellas, outstanding work as usual!!! Perhaps a deeper dive into the 1911 component of the story??? It will save me a trip to the WW1 museum in Kansas City, and I am a Raider fan!!! Keep up the good work !!! Thanks again!!!
I can't remember if it was Williams or Marbles that made an adapter for the aperture sight. It popped in and there were 3 different sizes. I remember seeing one on a 03A3. But if I am remembering right, it was for target competition back in the 30's.
York's famous action occurred just over 1 month before Germany surrendered. I imagine it was a very demoralized unit before Cpl (acting) York ever laid eye's on them.
Decades ago when I built my WWI collection I managed to acquire a P14 and P17. One was a Winchester and the other was an Eddystone. The P17 had a red band painted around the forward stock and heat-shield. This was because it had been part of the massive WWII lend-lease program of rifles that were used to arm the British Home Guard. They were also issued P14s chambered in 303. To avoid confusion, the red band was added to identify rifles chambered in 30-06. Sadly, I disposed of my entire collection years ago before the current collector's craze began. As to why the Army dropped the P17, I suspect it was due in part to its weight and handling. The Springfield wasn't as durable, but it was a pound lighter and a couple of inches shorter, making it more balanced and handier, which any soldier will prefer. Also, the government arsenals were set up to make Springfields, not P17s, and I doubt they wanted any civilian competition.
@37:45 Aside from the ones that went to the UK, the Philippines were armed with M1917s from US stocks. I don't remember how many exactly they got before December 7th, but I think it was almost a quarter million. The M1917s were used pretty heavily by Filipino guerillas, ammo supply depending. Most of them were used up by '45, but I've seen some of them show up in pics of captured weapons there into the '90s at least? Then I think the ROC was supplied with M1917s for the X Force in Burma, although I don't know off the top of my head how many went there.
The use of the M1917 in WW2 has intriqued me for years. I think it was used a lot for guard duty, training, etc. I have a pic of my dad who was in the Navy (I believe during boot camp) and he is holding a M1917. Later as an adult I became friends with a Korea War area vet who was an armorour. His rifle was also an M1917 as he was never deployoed over to Korea.
Absolutely love your program. I’m 64 and wanted more than anything to serve in our military ! Wasn’t able because of thyroid medication. I have had a true love of military weapons. One of my all time favorites that I’ve owned and shot was the FN-39 in 30-06 ! I would love to see how it stacks up compared to this -06. I presently shoot an Styer-AUG standard in 556 with 16-3/4” barrel all stock other than Matech rear and Ultradyne C4 front for primary and Eotech for back up !
Makes sense….A few years ago I started struggling with irons , age caught up to me. I ordered some peep sites for my mosins, mausers and even SKS…..they come with a big rear peep and a smaller front peep site and its made my old guns tack drivers again. Its basically the same thing as you lining the bunny ears up in the rear sites.
Possible. He himself stated, I recall reading some time ago, that he didn't like the aperture sight on the 1917, probably because in his civilian hunting experience open sights were the most common.
On my Winchester M1917, i solved the “large rear aperture” issue via a piece of blue painter’s tape and a fine punch and die set. The rear aperture is now < 0.063” and works great.
I have a 1917 that i picked up with zero hesitation after spotting it on a table in a gun show from 6 years ago. The rear aperture is quite wide, compared to my M1 i have noticed needing to pay particular attention to my sight picture, and i never quite put it together to use the wings in addition to the front sight blade til i saw this. Gonna try that out a little later, thanks Henry!
My boy, my beautiful boy! While I have made hits out to 500m (on 16" gongs so much bigger targets than you guys) I concur that the sight picture being that gross makes it more difficult than it should be for such accurate rifles. I've found personally backing off the rear sight a bit and that front sight assembly focus works pretty well.
The M1917 parade rifle I have does just about as well. That ladder sight is a bit wonky to use with the rather wide internal diameter. Edit: the ladder sight on mine looks to have a narrower diameter. It's a Remington August of 1918 production with mostly Eddystone fiddly bits.
A little more background" The Pattern 1913 Enfield (P'13) was an experimental rifle developed by the Royal Small Arms Factory for the British Army as a result of its combat experience in the Second Boer War from 1899 to 1902. The weapon was to serve as a replacement for the Short Magazine Lee-Enfield (SMLE). An advanced chamber design allowed for a high-velocity .276 Enfield rimless round, which was more powerful than the service-issued .303 British cartridge. Introduction of the P'13 was rendered impractical by the outbreak of the First World War.
Did Henry get 6 shots out of the first loading? Killing that target! My grandfather carried an M1917 in France and traded it with a couple of bottles of wine for an '03 because it was lighter.
Thanks for this video! The M1917 is a great rifle. It will more than hold its own at a CMP competition, and I personally like it just a bit more than the 1903A3. The reason the US Army didn’t adopt the M1917 after WW1 was because it didn’t have easy windage adjustment. Back then the opinion of competition shooters at Camp Perry were held in very high regard, and the 1903’s sights were particularly well suited for competition shooting. I like to think that some elements of the 1917 - the wings on either side of the rear sight, the front sight with the wings - inspired features of the M1 Garand.
Watch this video on History of Weapons and War! www.weaponsandwar.tv/9-hole-reviews/videos/20260706-m1917-pa-7
CORRECTION: @blokeontherange has recently messaged me about the British doctrinal use of the Dial Sights, which I called Volley Sights on the P14 rifle (predecessor to the M1917). These are essentially extended range sights that officers would command their men to "area fire" at large groups of men at long range and NOT use as a substitution for MG suppression fire.
Shot with M2 ball equivalent velocity 30-06 reloads using 155gr SMK.
Sorry I forgot to put the info on the cartridge slide.
Have you guys tried recreating the m1 ball round. According to accounts it was a 173 fmjbt. It performed to good and was overshooting all of the militaries rifle ranges. So they created m2 ball to tone down the ballistics so it wouldn't over shoot the rifle ranges.
M2 ball did not come around until 1940ish. M1 ball is a 173gr bullet at ~ 2740 fps and is usually a better performer from these old rifles.
So, you made a mistake. Sgt. York was originally issued a 1917 but he did not like the peep sights so he swapped it for a 1903 as soon as he was able. His famous actions were actually done with a 1903.
WW1 ammunition wasn't M2 Ball. Or M1 Ball. It would have been M1906 Ball. 150gr flat-base spitzer, cupronickel jacket, at around 2700f/s as measured ~78 feet from the muzzle.
M2 Ball is technically a 152gr flat-base spitzer with gilding-metal jacket at more like 2800f/s (well, 2740 at 26 yards, so corrects to nearly 2800 at the muzzle).
M1 Ball was adopted post-WW1 based on disappointing experience with long-range fires, M2 just prior to the WW2 buildup. Lots of outfits, though, did their best to get their hands on as much M2AP as possible once in combat.
What movie are the clips from?
I suspect all the problems were because you didn't lick your thumb, and get the front sight wet.
hahaha this man knows!!!!!! what a classic film
I thought it was because he didn't bait them with a turkey call
Us old guys know, 🦃 🦃 🦃
"Bullseye!"
Some of us youngns know too 😂
Which film?
“An elegant weapon, for a more civilized age.”
"I've been looking forward to this."
Bard wire, poison gas and machine guns,
@@jesper509 "At least I will die as a civilized man!" proceeds to cough out lungs while being eaten by rats.
Yeah, when millions of boys chopped each other to bits in the dirt
No, a Springfield Krag or 1903 was elegant!
The 1917 "Enfield' is ugly, awkward, and HEAVY!
I know, I own several of each! It was rugged, durable and accurate though!
04:10
"What happened to the target?"
You killed him Henry. You killed him.
Revenge for the few misses at 400y
"Neutralised..."
It went to Jesus.
Target said: "I' will nimmer!" and just sat down.
I think he hit the post just below the target and shattered it.
"...they went full Norinco on the Mauser action..." LOL
You can still occasionally find 1917s harvesting moose in western Alaska villages.
They were an issued rifle of Alaska guardsmen during WW2, and many remained in the villages long after their war service.
These rifles aren't exactly heirloom quality, but most still shoot and .30-06 in the right hands can harvest anything walking in North America.
I have a "red band" lend lease returned 1917. They were used in WWII for home island defense and training. Some British armorer fine-tuned the trigger and it breaks like glass. Extremely accurate. That was my Dad's rifle in WWI.
I'm so envious. My buddy from work got a "red stripe" 1917. The stock cleaned up beautifully. I never shot it alas.
@@dbmail545 Years ago I was at the range and next got me was a shooter with his match M1A getting ready for a contest. He was stunned to see the stock 1917 outshoot his rifle. Spoiler alert: I had made up match ammo for the 1917. There is a contributor to the 6mmBR site named German Salazar. Very experienced. He had a match 30-06 reamer made by Pacific Tool. ( 30-06 Serengeti Germán Salazar Chamber Reamer) The rifle with that chamber was better than his 308. The 308 being considered "better" by many likely boils down to the chamber dimensions and not "inherent" accuracy of the 308..
Red Band guns are RCAF, iirc
Have one of those red band rifles as well. Heavy and long, but a tack driver
@@thecanadianlanboy8132 100,000 purchased by Canada and about 750,000 by Britain for WWII.
This is the rifle still in use TODAY by the Sirius Dog Sled Patrol which is a Danish Naval Unit in charge of patrolling costal Greenland. It is the only rifle that they tested that would reliably function in the extreme cold the temperatures they face.
The must have been too poor for Tikkas
Sirius while a part of the Navy patrol all of the interior of northern Greenland. Not just the coast.
I have one made by Remington!
@@mrs.vasquezz Why get a Tikka? For what they are using it for, a milsurp is perfect.
@@Dominic1962canadian rangers recently swapped their old Enfields for tikkas
'Into the fires of hell, the Argonne, a hero to be,
Came to the war from over the sea!'
There on that day
Alvin York entered the fray
Saving the day
82nd all the way
Great job on telling Sgt. York's story Henry! I am a former seasonal interpreter that worked at the Sgt. York State Park in his tiny hometown of Pall Mall, Tennessee. He was given a nice two story house, paid for with donations from the American people. It still stands today thankfully!
Some details I always shared when I told the story is the firefight began and ended with the best friends of both Sgt. York and Lt. Volmer being killed (Volmer was an acting major so he was even worse off with extra responsibilities but no extra pay). Sgt. York's best friend Murray Savage was tragically among the Americans killed at the beginning of the firefight by the German maxim gun. He is mentioned in the Sgt. York movie "as being cut in half," by the machinegun fire, but Savage was never fleshed out as a character, only mentioned in passing in the movie.
The best explanation for why the Germans tried a bayonet charge I believe was they were paranoid about friendly fire, but yes, it is still strange they didn't attempt to return fire with their rifles. Perhaps they were too paranoid that they would also be picked off if they tried sticking their heads out, instead of simply charging down the hill as a group. They obviously didn't consider York had a 1911 as well as his rifle. The German leading that charge was Lt. Volmer's best friend, attempting a rescue. He was shot and mortally wounded by York's .45. Volmer believed there were more Americans in their rear so he wanted to cut his unit's losses and try to save his dying friend by surrendering.
The other 7 surviving members of the American patrol were overlooked for commendations in my opinion, however York was rightfully chosen for honors because he snatched victory from the jaws of defeat by doing the most damage, (which also allowed the larger Meuse-Argonne offensive to break through German lines and sever a key railroad for German supplies, forcing them to withdraw), and also by managing to stay in command long enough for him and the surviving patrol members to find more Americans to turn over the German prisoners.
This is already a long comment but I have one more interesting story to share about the 1903 Springfield vs 1917 rifle debate! My memory is a little foggy but while I was at the park, an interesting letter Sgt. York wrote to another Sergeant from the same division as him (1919 or 1920 dated?) turned up. York wrote to him asking if he still had that Springfield rifle, that was the one he did his shooting with. I am frustrated I forgot the Sergeant's name, but the museum curator did confirm this other sergeant was a gas casualty just before York's patrol would have moved out into the line. The scraps of evidence do suggest York may have had the chance to swap his 1917 for a 1903 Springfield while this other sergeant was being carried out of the line, but then the question becomes how did this other Sergeant get a 1903 for himself when their division all had model 1917s.
I've shot both rifles live and I love them both, but the 1917 with it's extra pound of weight (9 and a half pounds vs 8 and 1/2 for the 1903) and wider butt plate make it much nicer to shoot than the 1903 with it's narrow butt plate. I bruised my shoulder the first time I shot an 1903, not so with the 1917.
Great Video and thanks again for telling York's story!
I think the evidence is strongly in favor of him using the 1903. He also had stated that he preferred the sights of the 1903.
Incredible supplementary material! Thank you so much for sharing this!
Also of note, York turned out SEVERAL lucrative offers, and only accepted ones that helped the kids of his area he grew up in.
He worked hard, even through the great depression, to stand up a school for the kids in the region (i think he even mortgaged his home, and nearly lost his farm; and the original company that gave the farm to him even stopped paying for it only after a few years). He also got kicked out of the school for petty political differences; yet he still donated to the school, which still stands today and is among the best high schools in the country.
I’m so glad his life passion still perseveres to future generations.
From what I learned, and this was supposed to be from Alvin York's grandson, that he did infact trade for an 03 Springfield. York hated the sights on the Enfield. The Springfield had a notch sight much like his own rifle at home. In addition he trained with the Springfield in Boot camp.
I own an Eddystone made right here in PA. Othias from CandR Arsenal is a huge fan of the Pattern 14/Model 1917 rifle.
My first hunting rifle when I was 12 was a sporterized Eddystone with a scope, many years ago I also acquired an Eddystone in original military configuration. I also have a sporterized 03 and an OG 03A3. I've shot them all quite a bit but I love the original military 1917, really a fun gun to shoot.
Othias is big guy. Plus he didn't have to go on a long march, like your typical 130lb doughboy, where that weight matters.
Speaking of Othias, & C&Rsenal, I believe, the US lawfully licensed the 1903 design, from Mauser. Where they violated patents, was on the 06 ammo. Specifically the Spitzer bullet design. And they documented it, so it made the lawsuit easier. Watch the C&Rsenal 1903 video, to see if my old boomer brain, got it at least partially right.
I had to grin at Henry's "When War were Declared ..." homage to Othias. Fun cross-over.
The timing, the coincidence, its impeccable. Right after I buy a 1917 this video drops🇺🇸🦅
4:10 “He’s dead, Jim …”
The M-1917 saw a lot of use in Canada, we purchased 80,000 of them at the beginning of WW2, they were used for training, then passed on to the RCAF, and the Pacific Coast Militia Rangers. The PCMR loved them, as long as they were patrolling by boat. They found them a bit cumbersome in the forest, but appreciated their power.
According to Alvin Yorks son, he was told by Alvin that he swapped rifles with another soldier that had a 1903 because he preferred the sights. He even wrote in his diary that he hated the British sights.
I do think the controversy does come from the specific entry regarding his action because he simply wrote that he used “a rifle and a .45 Colt automatic pistol.” While the pistol is beyond doubt to be the M1911, the rifle itself wasn’t specified beyond “a rifle.”
I believe that is correct 💯. Somewhere in the "Shooting USA" Archives is a "Histories Guns" segment that tells the same story.
Strange because most shooters love the rear aperture site and detest the v-notch sight!
@@edmundcharles5278I’m more of a v-notch guy myself. I prefer the certainty of knowing what exactly the sight picture is supposed to be.
I attempted to use an M17 but couldn’t get used to the sights. The Mauser is superior!
My friend and I bought 2 P17's in the late 80's.
They were in unfired condition and had orange paint dabbed on the woodwork, which I believe indicated that they were British Home Guard issue and 30/06 calibre.
We both won numerous Military Comps with these fabulously accurate rifles.
We noticed both rifles shot roughly 6" high regardless of distance.
I read that this was deliberate as the Troops were trained to shoot using a 'belt' hold.
Or maybe it was the 150g Military ball ammo we used. Unfortunately both rifles are now well sold but I will never forget what a joy they were to shoot.
Great vid, thank you.
Believe had to have the bayonet on
The clusterfuck of many different varied forms of complicated sight systems that the 1903 and 1917 had and went through were largely because of all the different ordnance officers involved had their own weird and wacky preferences for their target shooting competitions and wanted to force those onto the new service rifle after being dissatisfied with the krag and rolling block for competition usage. The 1903 went through something like 6 entirely different sight systems/patterns more than 8+ times before settling on the 1903 production pattern.
The 1903 rear sight is fun to mess with on the range but it has to be about the worst practical combat sight on a bolt gun.
Alvin C York State Park in Pall Mall Tennessee [ just north of Jamestown Tn.] is well worth seeing if you are ever in the area.
yes it is been there and it is great
My 2nd deer rifle.
While growing up in West Columbia I was given an Enfield 303 British, however I wanted a more powerful cartridge rifle,(don't know why as you're lucky to see 50 to 100 yards in the woods there)
I swapped the Enfield for the 30-06 Springfield, as British .303 ammo was hard to find in the 70s S.E.Texas.30-06 was everywhere.
I bet a fudd sporterized it didn't they
@@jason200912 No it was all original as was the Enfield with the wood covering the barrel and peep sights on them both..
Wish I had them now...
@@unclebuzz6913 how did you lose it? Lack of gun interest and so it got pawned off?
We sent a lot of 1917s to the British from existing stores. They issued them to the Home Guard, along with Thompsons and .30-06 Lewis Guns. That way they could arm the Home Guard to free up arms for the Army and keep the logistic chains for American calibers and British calibers separate.
I have a P14 Enfield and I love the old girl.
And dumped them in the sea after the war
My buddy from work had one of those. It was marked with a band of red paint on the foreend to mark as using "non standard" .30 cal ammo.
@@JeffEbe-te2xs Heaven forbid the useless eaters get them. Can't have that
Little did they know the 1917 was better overall except in magazine size
I'm so glad that I have one of these rifles. Mine was lend leased and became a Danish Polar Defense Rifle, designated M53, and then came back home in the '90s as surplus. Dad bought it to have a deer rifle and thankfully he never sporterized it. My rifle is an Eddystone, that was never rebarreled.
As Hickok45 often points out, Alvin York was a proud son of Tennessee. The Boers were indirectly responsible for the 1917 Enfield. The British faced accurate and flat shooting 7x57 charger loaded '93 Mausers in the Boer War. After modifying the Long Lee Enfield to charger loading and shortening it to create the SMLE, they developed the .276 (7mm) cartridge and the Mauser derived P13. But for WWI, this could well have led to the demise of the .303 cartridge and the SMLE.
They had a bunch of developmental work to do with the .276. It was way too powerful (damn near a magnum) and burned up barrels.
Funny how they encountered the 7x57 (round nose even) in the m93/95 Mauser which is such a light kicking flat sweet shooter and thought, “You know what this needs…Let’s hot rod the ever loving piss out of this and put it in a massively overbuilt rifle…”
I was waiting for this rifle for so long... Thank you very much!
The original British design was the P1913 and it was chambered in rimless .276 Enfield or the 7x60. The British were at the time trying to replace the 303 but WW1 got started before they could make the switch.
Which led to the creation of the P1914. Which is chambered in .303. However it was more so used as a sniper weapon and the SMLE was the standard issue rifle.
Hearing a former US Army officer excitedly describe a well over 100 year old Medal of Honor action, and getting even more excited that maybe it was with a good ole American Winchester, and that officer is an immigrant….? Man I love this country.
The 1917 Enfield was also a star of the Battle of Athens, Tennessee in 1946
Showed them badges what's what.
You have no idea how long I’ve been waiting for this to drop! By far my favorite bolt gun.
Mine too.
One of my all time favorite rifles!!
I visited the Alvin C. York state historic site several years ago. The rangers there at the time were very knowledgeable. When I asked the question about which rifle York used they knew where I was coming from with the question. According to them Alvin's son Andrew who had worked there before his passing insisted that his father never liked "that English rifle." That leads me to believe he used a Springfield.
My grandfather was a radio man in a 4.2" mortar battalion. He was issued A P-17 in basic and took it when he was shipped to the Pacific. He later was given an M-1 carbine.
Thank you. I have been waiting for this one. The shift in sighting mind set was very informative. I believe the P13/P14/M1917 was the first one that integrated a peep rear sight as standard, a concept that was used on most Western military rifles made after- BAR, the Thompson, Garand, Carbine and beyond.
Awesome rifle! Thanks again.
I feel like the British copied the p14 sights for the lee Enfield no4
Henry, I think it's time for you to do a "shooting with iron sights" masterclass. This type of shooting isn't easy and I think I'd be great to learn.
I discovered the Model 1917 seven years ago and like Henry it is one of my favorite rifles. Also like Henry I pair it with the Colt 1911 that my great uncle carried in France in 1918. He was in the 89th infantry division at Staint Mihiel and then the Meuse-Argonne when the armistice ended operations. The 89th did occupation duty and uncle Frank finally came home in the summer of 1919.
I always remember reading about the war in Philippines after the Japanese conquest and the Filipino troops claiming that though the Enfield was heavier, it stood up to conditions that put the Springfield out of usability.
That’s because the Brits managed to simplify the Mauser action (as did the Japanese) while the US managed to add complexity to it.
@@Dominic1962 It's more that they stayed closer to the original.
you must mis-remember. I've read the poorly designed ejector caused many rifles to go tango uniform.
@@23GreyFox Who?
I`d love to see this done using ballistic lab dummies for targets, then assess the differences in damage at the different distances...
Moment of silence for that target that got dropped lol
I also watched Victory at Sea growing up. My father had been a combat photographer in the Pacific during World War II. Sometimes while we were watching Victory at Sea, He would point out pictures, or films (he did both) that he had taken. I did not think anyone of your generation would have every seen Victory At Sea. I am glad you got to see it.
Love this! As a younger man I made the decision that I wanted to a WW1 American rifle to go with my WW2 Garand. After much research I decided to seek out a M1917. 8 months of see nearly no be available I happened on the one. It was in such great shape that I purchased it even though it was about $75 more than I was expecting to pay. Many years later when my first son became big enough to lift it, it became his favorite rifle, and the shooting/history bug was passed down to another generation.
My grandfather who grew up in rural Illinois, was with the 90th Infantry Division (Tough Ombres!) during WWI and carried an M1917. He always said he liked the M1917 and had only one complaint, it was one heavy sum-of-a-bitch! Later in life, his hunting rifle was a NRA sporterized M1903, "cuz I got it cheap" oh and his hunting shotgun was a rabbit eared LC Smith side by side in 12 Ga. No fancy pump gun like my dad used. Damn I miss them both. :(
Great video!
A note about the M1917 in WW2. They were used in training stateside. IIRC it saw use with the Philippine Army in 1941-1942 as well as with Guerillas during the Japanese occupation. They were also supplied (ironically) to the British following Dunkirk to make up for an arms shortage. These can be identified with a red band marked .30-06 to differentiate them from P14s that were brought out at the same time. Additionally they were supplied in some quantity to Free French units in 1944.
As noted I have one of the red banded ones
They were also used by Alaska native guardsman during WW2 and the early stages of the Cold War.
You can still find them in the homes of some older villagers, they do get passed down from son to son.
They aren't pretty, Alaska's west coast will do that to you, but most of them still shoot and some still harvest critters.
Correct.
Some 1917s did make it to North Africa, with the field artillery. They were also used by the Chinese, and Free French.
Speaking of battle sights, the battle sight range on a 1903 Springfield was 547 yards. Which seems like an odd number. Until you do the math, and it comes out to 500 meters.
Even back then, there was no avoiding the metric system!
This story and video was so good, I actually listened to the WHOLE THING. Thank you Henry and Josh!
One of your best ever. Liked the history lesson at the end. Thank you!
That 450 yd. Target DEFINITELY WIGGLED, like a hit.
I have a Winchester. Amazing rifle, greatly prefer it over the 1903. It was also the first , secondary, service rifle to out produce it's main counterpart.
Henry shooting at up to 500 yards with iron sights and still hitting with so few misses is almost superhuman! I have a lot of trouble shooting that accurate at a 100m let alone over 400m!
Go back and watch the Finnish M39 video, you won't be disappointed
People can make 700 yard shots with irons too. Past that they miss a ton of times and just do accuracy by volume of fire
@@jason200912500yds was the easiest position during USMC quals, even with irons. Five minutes, five shots, from the prone. That is where you padded your score.
That's no optics, and M16A1.
Old Marine Corps, if you can see it, you can hit it.
Bad news for ya, we qualled out to 500 with the M16A1 and the M16A2 in the Marines...no optics for us in the 1980's.
@@zebdemingand the Swedish mauser video
04:10 "Neutralized!"
Had to break out my 03-A3 and handle it as you told his story. Great work! Enjoy your content!
Wasn't the reason for the complex sight on the 1903 William Crozier the chief of army ordinance?
Othias' favorite person
As a modern Holographic sight hipster, I like the M1917's idea of using the entire bracket as a focus
It's a weird one if you're not used to it, but once it makes sense, it's highly effective.
WOW, Definitely your best video yet. Awesome piece of history!!!
I've always preferred the M1917 to the M1903. Also, nothing about the Sirius sled patrol....
I’ve been waiting on this one a very long time. I have one and it shoots superbly.
Absolutely love my 1903A3... Don't shoot it too often, but it still gets the job done.. Thanks for the fantastic history lesson, and keep up the great work 👍
Now this is an episode I’ve been wanting for a long time
Henry, Thanks for the detailed explanation on your sight alignment issues / modified technique. It might be helpful information for dealing with larger apertured peep sights.
Proper sight alignment and having the muscle memory to hold the weapon *Perfectly* straight and level; trying to avoid the possibility of slightly canting them at all, is SUPER overlooked when discussing a weapon or shooters accuracy. ESPECIALLY the longer your sight radius is and when firing at extended ranges as by being more accurate, adjusting the zero and windage has a larger effect but requires less actual "adjusting" to do it meaning a slight misalignment can result in a massive point of aim and bloom your MOA.
And obviously at long range where your target is smaller, and any sight adjustments effect is multiplied the further out the target is, proper alignment becomes exponentially more "that important".
And that's just a properly zeroed sight by itself, not taking windage, bullet drift off too whichever direction its rifling twists due to the rotational force spinning the bullet, the slight curvature of the earth extreme long range sniping has to calculate for example, etc.
And any errors in any of those calculations, will exponentially magnify accuracy issues from a user improperly aligning the sights even more.
God Bless you boys - your work is truly a delight to watch.
I love my Eddystone 1917. Very accurate rifle
I concur, just as great as my Smith Corona 1903A3 if not slightly better.
If you have not already done so, I urge you to go out of your way and visit Pall Mall, Tennessee and see where Sgt Alvin York lived and is buried. His home, his grave, his church, his land, the humble community. And humble is the word. Everything he pursued in life before and after the war was for the betterment of his humble home and community on the Wolf River as a farming region. Beautiful place and his family general store makes a good hamburger.
Howdy Henry & Josh, you guys hit on a few of my historical soap box rants. No one likes unsolicited lunatic ramblings, but it’ll bother me if I don’t speak up haha
The three things I want to touch on are:
1) The M1917 outnumbered the M1903… sort of
2) The movie might actually be right about York using a 1903
3) The controversy surrounding the story of York’s MoH
1) Yes, technically there were a lot more men with M1917s in France by the end of WWI, but this is misleading. The US made an effort to standardize arms within divisions to simplify logistics. The “regulars” in divisions 1-6 and the first three Nat’l Guard divisions deployed (26th, 32nd, 42nd) were equipped with the M1903. The rest of the NG (mostly) and the conscripts received M1917s. With roughly three dozen divisions sent to France before armistice (a few broken up for replacements), this shakes out to about 70% M1917s, 25% M1903s, and 5% under British command with SMLEs (27th & 30th).
This falls apart a bit when you consider the timeline of US involvement. US infantry was first actively engaged in late October 1917, just over 12 months before armistice. It wasn’t until the 77th arrived in April 1918 that there was an M1917-equipped division in France. They’d first see action a few months later in June/July. This means the M1917 played no role in the first half of active US involvement on the Western Front, which is also why most of the propaganda posters don’t depict it.
The M1903 continued to outnumber the M1917 in France until the 90th arrived in June. They would first see action in August. So the M1903 outnumbered the M1917 in the trenches for the first two-thirds of America’s involvement on the Western Front. In the last four months of the war, the bulk of the volunteers and conscripts poured in and the M1917 finally outnumbered the M1903.
2) York’s division, the 82nd not-yet-airborne, was a conscript division equipped with the M1917. In his diary he talks about training with an M1903, and then his unit later having them all replaced with M1917s. So the (very logical) conclusion is that he had an M1917, if not for a letter he wrote in 1920 to a friend where he says:
“Say James do you remember that little Springfield rifle that you gave me as we went up to the front line. That is the rifle that I did my shooting with. I used it and my Colts [sic] pistol.”
This letter is in the collection of the Alvin C. York Foundation. It was sent to Sgt. James Percy Cooper, who served in a medical detachment during the war. From what a volunteer with the Foundation told me, Cooper was assigned to (or just stationed adjacent to) York’s regiment. They met and became friends. York brought up his fondness for the M1903 he had in training. Cooper was in a unit that had M1903s, so he offered to trade rifles. That letter is the only hard evidence I’ve seen of this interaction, though. I have the pdf scan of the letter. Can find a way to send it to you if you're curious.
I’m unsure how they determined what rifles to issue support units, but it seems unlikely they’d be different than the division they were attached to. The 82nd fought adjacent to the 1st and 42nd in the Meuse-Argonne, with the 2nd and 32nd also in the area. It’s possible Cooper was attached to one of those M1903-equipped divisions and they met during staging or something. The story is very farfetched, but the clear wording in the letter is difficult to brush aside.
3) In recent years there has been a push to collect the stories of the other men on York’s MoH patrol, and they paint a somewhat different picture of events. It is now believed that York’s actions may have been embellished somewhat (without his input) by the staff as a political move to help their careers. I highly recommend this lecture on the topic if you have an hour to spare:
youtu.be/watch?v=vbxh2aivmgQ
Also I have one of the rare and adorable M1917 carbines cut down by Ishapore for the Chinese X-Force soldiers fighting in Burma. You're welcome to borrow it, although the rifling is quite... tired:
youtu.be/watch?v=F-Qu3vltnRU
If 70% only "sort of" outnumbers 25% then please never work with numbers.
@@ALovelyBunchOfDragonballz You apparently did not continue reading. For most of the war, there were none in action. 70% is only a snapshot of the composition at the end of the war. Most of the divisions that used them during the war saw action in the last month at most. Some only for the last few days.
Always great content.
Thanks
Would love one of those old gems.
Pfc. York would have adjusted, and he would have had no problem using the M-17. He was sighting the weapon's limitations. Cool Story! When I checked many years ago, the .30-06 was the most prolific cartridge in the world. That was a couple of decades ago. I would live to see how the new .277 cartridge performs next to it.
got one of these at an auction last year in really nice shape, happy to see it on the course!
I have a sporterized Remington Model 17 as a field carry PA deer, elk, bear rifle.
Forgotten Weapons (IAN) has noted he prefers the P1917 too
Because it's clearly better. The only advantage of the 1903 is it's lighter and shorter and is cock on open
Now im no expert, but from my experience of research (amateurly), i would say the 1903 was a better target rifle, while the 1917 Enfield was a better combat rifle. That being said, both performed admirably during the war and served the US well.
Ooh, I’ve been waiting for this one
After World War II, the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force also used this rifle and a sniper rifle with a scope. They are displayed at the Weapons School of the Self-Defense Force.
I have got one of these rifles, Winchester production. I also have a couple of modern, more expensive rifles, but this old gun is by far my favorite. It often gets out on the range while my modern ones rarely see daylight.
Definitely a solid battle rifle IMO.
Thanks for the video, I very much enjoyed the passion Henry has for history. Up here across the medicine line we saw both Pattern 14 as well as M1917 rifles for sale as surplus in the '60's - along with Mk III and No 4 Mk 1 LE rifles of course. Strangely enough, on the Pattern 14/M 1917 front, I can recall only seeing a handful of Winchester made rifles. We'd see about a 2:1 ratio of Eddystone to Remington made rifles I want to say, but that's going off a semi-old guy's memories from a long time ago. We also saw a bunch of the Pattern 14/M1917 rifles "sporterized" as well, many with the original barrels which shot amazingly well. All the best.
Fellas, outstanding work as usual!!! Perhaps a deeper dive into the 1911 component of the story??? It will save me a trip to the WW1 museum in Kansas City, and I am a Raider fan!!! Keep up the good work !!! Thanks again!!!
Great content as usual.
Really enjoyed this! Thanks
Arguably the best bolt action rifle of the war.
IMO it's one of the best bolt action service rifles to exist.
I can't remember if it was Williams or Marbles that made an adapter for the aperture sight. It popped in and there were 3 different sizes. I remember seeing one on a 03A3. But if I am remembering right, it was for target competition back in the 30's.
Great video! Great looking rifle!
Noticed your bottle of Dalwhinnie, one of my favorite single malts. Another would be Glenrothes. Really enjoy your channel, Thank you.
My mother was from Fentress County, TN and went to HS with some of Alvin York's children.
York's famous action occurred just over 1 month before Germany surrendered. I imagine it was a very demoralized unit before Cpl (acting) York ever laid eye's on them.
Former army 12b! I was plt armor! And expert on rifle and mechine gun! Love your videos! You tech good! Just found your videos today!
Decades ago when I built my WWI collection I managed to acquire a P14 and P17. One was a Winchester and the other was an Eddystone. The P17 had a red band painted around the forward stock and heat-shield. This was because it had been part of the massive WWII lend-lease program of rifles that were used to arm the British Home Guard. They were also issued P14s chambered in 303. To avoid confusion, the red band was added to identify rifles chambered in 30-06. Sadly, I disposed of my entire collection years ago before the current collector's craze began. As to why the Army dropped the P17, I suspect it was due in part to its weight and handling. The Springfield wasn't as durable, but it was a pound lighter and a couple of inches shorter, making it more balanced and handier, which any soldier will prefer. Also, the government arsenals were set up to make Springfields, not P17s, and I doubt they wanted any civilian competition.
@37:45 Aside from the ones that went to the UK, the Philippines were armed with M1917s from US stocks. I don't remember how many exactly they got before December 7th, but I think it was almost a quarter million. The M1917s were used pretty heavily by Filipino guerillas, ammo supply depending. Most of them were used up by '45, but I've seen some of them show up in pics of captured weapons there into the '90s at least?
Then I think the ROC was supplied with M1917s for the X Force in Burma, although I don't know off the top of my head how many went there.
The use of the M1917 in WW2 has intriqued me for years. I think it was used a lot for guard duty, training, etc. I have a pic of my dad who was in the Navy (I believe during boot camp) and he is holding a M1917. Later as an adult I became friends with a Korea War area vet who was an armorour. His rifle was also an M1917 as he was never deployoed over to Korea.
Absolutely love your program. I’m 64 and wanted more than anything to serve in our military ! Wasn’t able because of thyroid medication. I have had a true love of military weapons. One of my all time favorites that I’ve owned and shot was the FN-39 in 30-06 ! I would love to see how it stacks up compared to this -06. I presently shoot an Styer-AUG standard in 556 with 16-3/4” barrel all stock other than Matech rear and Ultradyne C4 front for primary and Eotech for back up !
I had a great uncle in WWII. He and a lot of contemporary’s would modify the rear sight on the Garand.
Makes sense….A few years ago I started struggling with irons , age caught up to me. I ordered some peep sites for my mosins, mausers and even SKS…..they come with a big rear peep and a smaller front peep site and its made my old guns tack drivers again. Its basically the same thing as you lining the bunny ears up in the rear sites.
War time
Wouldn’t surprise me if SGT York acquired a Springfield
Possible. He himself stated, I recall reading some time ago, that he didn't like the aperture sight on the 1917, probably because in his civilian hunting experience open sights were the most common.
Much as I love the Springfield, I will stand on the hill that this was the better rifle. It certainly looks nicer than the Springfield.
Thanks for making it that much harder to find a good deal on the M1917. Good content though!
On my Winchester M1917, i solved the “large rear aperture” issue via a piece of blue painter’s tape and a fine punch and die set. The rear aperture is now < 0.063” and works great.
I have a 1917 that i picked up with zero hesitation after spotting it on a table in a gun show from 6 years ago. The rear aperture is quite wide, compared to my M1 i have noticed needing to pay particular attention to my sight picture, and i never quite put it together to use the wings in addition to the front sight blade til i saw this. Gonna try that out a little later, thanks Henry!
My boy, my beautiful boy!
While I have made hits out to 500m (on 16" gongs so much bigger targets than you guys) I concur that the sight picture being that gross makes it more difficult than it should be for such accurate rifles. I've found personally backing off the rear sight a bit and that front sight assembly focus works pretty well.
My M1917 is my absolute favorite in my collection. Such a fantastic looking and shooting rifle
The M1917 parade rifle I have does just about as well. That ladder sight is a bit wonky to use with the rather wide internal diameter.
Edit: the ladder sight on mine looks to have a narrower diameter. It's a Remington August of 1918 production with mostly Eddystone fiddly bits.
Now we need a video with the Colt or Smith and Wesson Model 1917
A little more background"
The Pattern 1913 Enfield (P'13) was an experimental rifle developed by the Royal Small Arms Factory for the British Army as a result of its combat experience in the Second Boer War from 1899 to 1902. The weapon was to serve as a replacement for the Short Magazine Lee-Enfield (SMLE). An advanced chamber design allowed for a high-velocity .276 Enfield rimless round, which was more powerful than the service-issued .303 British cartridge. Introduction of the P'13 was rendered impractical by the outbreak of the First World War.
Did Henry get 6 shots out of the first loading? Killing that target! My grandfather carried an M1917 in France and traded it with a couple of bottles of wine for an '03 because it was lighter.
Magazine capacity of a 1917 is six rounds.
You saw right.
Thanks for this video! The M1917 is a great rifle. It will more than hold its own at a CMP competition, and I personally like it just a bit more than the 1903A3. The reason the US Army didn’t adopt the M1917 after WW1 was because it didn’t have easy windage adjustment. Back then the opinion of competition shooters at Camp Perry were held in very high regard, and the 1903’s sights were particularly well suited for competition shooting. I like to think that some elements of the 1917 - the wings on either side of the rear sight, the front sight with the wings - inspired features of the M1 Garand.
Y’all should come out to SGT Alvin C. York State Park in Pall Mall, TN for their Armistice/Veterans Day events. It’s a great WW1 reenactment event.