I absolutely love the old P14 and P17 actions. I like the way you do them, rather similar to my style. It will take anything from a 300 magnum to a 505 Gibbs. Bil Holmes used to do excellent work on them and I try to model mine after his instructions. You are a very adapt gunsmith and I love to watch your uploads.Greetings from South Africa.
Thanks, I've done a 338 RUM and a .428 wildcat magnum on these and a ton of smaller stuff but nothing bigger. I'll have to try and find some photos of his work. I do these just like the guy I learned from use to do them.
Many of these old military rifles were drill and tapped by the owners, who ordered them by mail out of a catalog. The holes didn't have to be accurate, because scopes in those days had tons of adjustment. Ralph DiTore, the 1917 actions are at the top of the gunsmith world in strength and longevity, and will withstand the pounding of even the most powerful cartridges today.
If you understand how to TIG and have and aluminum heatsink mandrel, easy to make, you can TIG the holes on the ring easily. You are only filling the holes and so less heat is needed to TIG them closed and re-drill and re-tap those holes. I’ve done it many times. The critical part of the receiver are the mating surfaces for the locking lugs when the bolt is closed. Filling the holes with a TIG does not require that much heat. Good video though.
6-48 is ok for .22s and the like, but I even re-drill,tap my .22s out to 8-40 now just because I can and I like the beefier screws. Does require opening up the holes on the actual weaver or picatinny bases though.
Those small taps are so brittle you drill all yours holes first then get everything out of the way to tap. Ive broken many a taps that small. Super brittle
Everything was lined up before milling any holes. I actually took a third measurement in the middle of the mandrel as well that I didn't show. Therefore my table was running true across all holes. After dialing everything in. I just ran the 4 holes making sure to get the spacing correct for 2 piece bases. Had it been for a once piece, then the space between the 2nd and 3rd holes would need to be measured.
Center finder tool. If the hole- is off to the side it can be tricky, but you should be able to get really close. You then double check that your second hole will cut all the way around. If not, you can split the difference a thou or 2 to clean up both holes and still be spaced properly apart. It's more of a measure, once, twice. Thrice, and quadruple check everything before cutting. Even if the center finder won't find center based on a mis-aligned hole, it should still tell you if you are on side to side based on the alignment of the tool. Another option, would be to screw in a screw, tighten it down, and use an edge finder to get the center of the hole. Ether way works.
In the Y axis? No, While you could use one and it could be quicker with a quick tool change, I used an edge finder on both sides and dialed in to the center. This was done after making sure that the indexing bar was parallel to the X axis with zero runout behind and in front of the intended holes. The hole spacing on the X axis plane was found measuring off the front of the receiver ring with an edge finder and dialing in specified spacing. The goal of this is to line everything up on the raceway of the receiver and not rely on the OD of the action or the barrel which may be off. Doing this along with a trued up barrel and chamber job, will diminish having a scope run out of adjustment in one direction or another.
I actually sold this one and after regretting selling it, The guy I sold it to called me out of the blue looking to sell it. Got it back. Don't plan on selling it again.
This is done before installing the barrel, also the barrel should be lined up with the action. If its not, then the barrel install was not done properly. In reality, you can have the scope canted in any direction, if you zero at one range and shoot that all the time or close to it, you would never know as long as the scope has enough adjustment to zero. It would show up in a target gun real quick however and wouldn't track at all. While this is the best method to line up scope holes, the Forster jig works almost as well. It gets them extremely close, but you are still relying on the OD of the barrel, which in most cases is not in line with the bore.
Ideally yeah, but It can be done with the barrel on. you just need to be aware that you don't want to cut into the barrel further than the action depth, and you'll need a bottoming tap. Basically you will cut off the threads of the barrel where the scope base hole will be. No need to go deeper into the barrel.
A long action one will fit, however, you need to re-drill at least one set of holes in the base to match the enfield. The spacing on the 110 long action bolt holes is longer and the short is too short. You also need to cut About 1/2" in length from the base. So, you can make them fit, but it takes some work. One of the last videos I did titled "removing stuck barrels" I have a photo of one done like this at the end.
Precision Machine Shed I saw one of your builds which had a long action picitinny rail. It appears that you prefer to contour your action round as opposed to a Remington 700 or Winchester 70 contour, so I assume you are using savage mounts. Is the process you describe how you make your bases?
From my experience, if Remington made the Enfield action, then a Model 700 base generally works. I have used the dual dovetail bases on Enfield actions. Also from my experience, model 70 bases work on Winchester Enfield actions. Eddystone, anyone’s guess.
Joshua Lucas If the machinist is milling the dog ear sights off the rifle, then I don’t understand why it matters if it’s a Remington, a Winchester or Eddystone. The Remington 700 base or Winchester 70 base aren’t going to fit without contouring the action specifically, that’s why I was asking if the round contour is easiest to machine and thus, the long action savage base.
Many of them are converted to magnum chamberings. For me it's the ability to style that whole receiver into something nice that not many people do anymore. When done properly, they are smooth as glass, able to take large cartridges, streamlined, and make a really nice sporting rifle. They also have coned bolt noses and barrels which many custom receivers have today. They also have a 2° canted lugs which allow for less sizing of brass and much easier extraction of spent cases. When done up right they make a really nice rifle. If you have never handled one that has been completely worked over, you probably would have a hard time thinking it was anything special.
@@precisionmachineshed "Able to take" and cable of safely chambering Magnum chamber pressures are two different things. Got good liability insurance? How about disability and life insurance? Idiot.
DEEREMEYER1 pretty harsh to call him an idiot. Any builder of these enfields will be well aware of the well documented issues with some of these receivers as well as the path to proceed safely. I.e. removing stress from barrel prior to removal, magnafluxing, etc. I certainly don’t consider the poster to be an idiot
I absolutely love the old P14 and P17 actions. I like the way you do them, rather similar to my style. It will take anything from a 300 magnum to a 505 Gibbs. Bil Holmes used to do excellent work on them and I try to model mine after his instructions. You are a very adapt gunsmith and I love to watch your uploads.Greetings from South Africa.
Thanks, I've done a 338 RUM and a .428 wildcat magnum on these and a ton of smaller stuff but nothing bigger. I'll have to try and find some photos of his work. I do these just like the guy I learned from use to do them.
Many of these old military rifles were drill and tapped by the owners, who ordered them by mail out of a catalog. The holes didn't have to be accurate, because scopes in those days had tons of adjustment. Ralph DiTore, the 1917 actions are at the top of the gunsmith world in strength and longevity, and will withstand the pounding of even the most powerful cartridges today.
Any chance of showing your indicator setup next time?
If you understand how to TIG and have and aluminum heatsink mandrel, easy to make, you can TIG the holes on the ring easily. You are only filling the holes and so less heat is needed to TIG them closed and re-drill and re-tap those holes. I’ve done it many times. The critical part of the receiver are the mating surfaces for the locking lugs when the bolt is closed. Filling the holes with a TIG does not require that much heat. Good video though.
Tigs the way to go, bolt handles too , quick & almost no heat
Very well, put together video. Thanks
Glad you liked it!
Do you do this still
I need a Mauser reciever drilled an taped
Yep, apexrifles.com is my business.
6-48 is ok for .22s and the like, but I even re-drill,tap my .22s out to 8-40 now just because I can and I like the beefier screws. Does require opening up the holes on the actual weaver or picatinny bases though.
Great video! Why not tap the hole before you move on to drilling the next? Just curious...
Those small taps are so brittle you drill all yours holes first then get everything out of the way to tap. Ive broken many a taps that small. Super brittle
Nice vid! Happy New Year!
Thanks, Harper new year.
@@precisionmachineshed , I have a question.......
*Do you work on the 1903 Springfield???*
did you use the mandrel centterline to drill the third hole and did you know the distance between the second and third hole
Everything was lined up before milling any holes. I actually took a third measurement in the middle of the mandrel as well that I didn't show. Therefore my table was running true across all holes. After dialing everything in. I just ran the 4 holes making sure to get the spacing correct for 2 piece bases. Had it been for a once piece, then the space between the 2nd and 3rd holes would need to be measured.
forgive me for being an ass but how did you locate that third hole in the x axis.i understand that everything is lined up in the y
never mind I had a brain fart you did the third hole just like the first
Center finder tool. If the hole- is off to the side it can be tricky, but you should be able to get really close. You then double check that your second hole will cut all the way around. If not, you can split the difference a thou or 2 to clean up both holes and still be spaced properly apart. It's more of a measure, once, twice. Thrice, and quadruple check everything before cutting. Even if the center finder won't find center based on a mis-aligned hole, it should still tell you if you are on side to side based on the alignment of the tool.
Another option, would be to screw in a screw, tighten it down, and use an edge finder to get the center of the hole.
Ether way works.
yes I understand now. my mill drill just has dials and and can be a pain in the ass
Does anybody know if the 8-40 Tap is UNC, UNF or UNEF thread ?
Nice work, where did you find the receiver fixture?
I made it.
did you use a coax to line up on that first hole in x
In the Y axis? No, While you could use one and it could be quicker with a quick tool change, I used an edge finder on both sides and dialed in to the center. This was done after making sure that the indexing bar was parallel to the X axis with zero runout behind and in front of the intended holes. The hole spacing on the X axis plane was found measuring off the front of the receiver ring with an edge finder and dialing in specified spacing. The goal of this is to line everything up on the raceway of the receiver and not rely on the OD of the action or the barrel which may be off. Doing this along with a trued up barrel and chamber job, will diminish having a scope run out of adjustment in one direction or another.
Let me know if you ever want to sell the Rusnok. I have been looking for one to no avail.
I actually sold this one and after regretting selling it, The guy I sold it to called me out of the blue looking to sell it. Got it back. Don't plan on selling it again.
Absolutely perfect to action but not to barrel which is more important.
This is done before installing the barrel, also the barrel should be lined up with the action. If its not, then the barrel install was not done properly. In reality, you can have the scope canted in any direction, if you zero at one range and shoot that all the time or close to it, you would never know as long as the scope has enough adjustment to zero. It would show up in a target gun real quick however and wouldn't track at all. While this is the best method to line up scope holes, the Forster jig works almost as well. It gets them extremely close, but you are still relying on the OD of the barrel, which in most cases is not in line with the bore.
Does one have to remove barrel when doing this, like Remington 700 action?
Ideally yeah, but It can be done with the barrel on. you just need to be aware that you don't want to cut into the barrel further than the action depth, and you'll need a bottoming tap. Basically you will cut off the threads of the barrel where the scope base hole will be. No need to go deeper into the barrel.
Would a savage 110 base line up well with that action?
A long action one will fit, however, you need to re-drill at least one set of holes in the base to match the enfield. The spacing on the 110 long action bolt holes is longer and the short is too short. You also need to cut About 1/2" in length from the base.
So, you can make them fit, but it takes some work. One of the last videos I did titled "removing stuck barrels" I have a photo of one done like this at the end.
Precision Machine Shed I saw one of your builds which had a long action picitinny rail. It appears that you prefer to contour your action round as opposed to a Remington 700 or Winchester 70 contour, so I assume you are using savage mounts. Is the process you describe how you make your bases?
From my experience, if Remington made the Enfield action, then a Model 700 base generally works. I have used the dual dovetail bases on Enfield actions.
Also from my experience, model 70 bases work on Winchester Enfield actions.
Eddystone, anyone’s guess.
Joshua Lucas If the machinist is milling the dog ear sights off the rifle, then I don’t understand why it matters if it’s a Remington, a Winchester or Eddystone. The Remington 700 base or Winchester 70 base aren’t going to fit without contouring the action specifically, that’s why I was asking if the round contour is easiest to machine and thus, the long action savage base.
Same radii
Do your on other folks 1917s? Drill tap for scope!
Yes, email me at precisionmachineshed@gmail.com
Since when are scopes aligned with receivers instead of barrels?
Since day 1.
I need to find a good gunsmith that can fix scope mount bases on my rifle
Apex Custom Rifles, LLC
another 1917? Whats so special about this action? I know they were popular for mag cartridges due to it's length.
Many of them are converted to magnum chamberings. For me it's the ability to style that whole receiver into something nice that not many people do anymore. When done properly, they are smooth as glass, able to take large cartridges, streamlined, and make a really nice sporting rifle. They also have coned bolt noses and barrels which many custom receivers have today. They also have a 2° canted lugs which allow for less sizing of brass and much easier extraction of spent cases. When done up right they make a really nice rifle. If you have never handled one that has been completely worked over, you probably would have a hard time thinking it was anything special.
good to know.... not following coned bolt noses and barrels
@@precisionmachineshed "Able to take" and cable of safely chambering Magnum chamber pressures are two different things. Got good liability insurance? How about disability and life insurance? Idiot.
@@deeremeyer1749 you call him an idiot for saying something that other people do? Such an intellectual
DEEREMEYER1 pretty harsh to call him an idiot. Any builder of these enfields will be well aware of the well documented issues with some of these receivers as well as the path to proceed safely. I.e. removing stress from barrel prior to removal, magnafluxing, etc. I certainly don’t consider the poster to be an idiot