Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
Gun Laws Pending in Texas / Re: Constitutional Carry - HB 375 and HB 1911
« Last post by TexasRedneck on April 08, 2019, 12:57:38 AM »
IMHO, Bonnen had NO intention of ever allowing the legislation to see the floor for a vote - this was just a good excuse.  Otherwise, we're forced to believe that he's small-minded enough to punish the millions of law-abiding Texans for the actions of ONE person.  And I'll add that you're reading HIS version of events - I've seen several stories with a different narrative.
12
Gun Laws Pending in Texas / Re: Constitutional Carry - HB 375 and HB 1911
« Last post by Wolfwood on April 07, 2019, 03:08:59 PM »
i dont quite understand the rationale of this being cancelled, but i am pretty naive to politics i guess

https://www.texastribune.org/2019/04/05/texas-constitutional-carry-dead-Jonathan-stickland/ 

anyone have thoughts on this?

"According to the Houston Chronicle, Bonnen called the activist's move “gutless.” And Democratic state Rep. Poncho Nevárez, D-Eagle Pass, who chairs the House committee where Stickland’s legislation was referred, told The Texas Tribune this morning that he initially planned to give the bill a hearing but, “the behavior of certain groups and/or individuals who are unreasonable on their expectations and even more unreasonable in their behavior caused me to reconsider."

" “I refuse to act like it is still a possibility and continue to provide false hope to my constituents,” Stickland said. “I cannot participate in political theatre and ask that Texans come to Austin to spend their time and money for a piece of legislation that has no path to success.” "

^quoted from article

13
General / Re: This Old Military Rifle
« Last post by TexasRedneck on March 11, 2019, 07:29:15 PM »
The Eddystone's are all gone....sorry!
14
General / Re: This Old Military Rifle
« Last post by Henry Bowman on March 06, 2019, 10:30:14 PM »
I paid $750.00 for mine a couple of years ago......was happy to pay for an unmolested non-import....without the bayonet...
15
General / Re: This Old Military Rifle
« Last post by TexasRedneck on March 06, 2019, 10:09:40 PM »
What is the average price on those now ?

I'll check and let you know.....
16
General / Re: This Old Military Rifle
« Last post by 308nato on March 06, 2019, 08:21:32 PM »
Thanks for that!  We got a bunch of 'em in at the shop from an estate - folks just aren't as interested in the old war-horses as they once were - it's a shame.



What is the average price on those now ?
17
General / Re: This Old Military Rifle
« Last post by TexasRedneck on March 06, 2019, 07:25:15 AM »
Thanks for that!  We got a bunch of 'em in at the shop from an estate - folks just aren't as interested in the old war-horses as they once were - it's a shame.
18
Long Guns for Sale / Re: Norinco underfolder - in .223
« Last post by TexasRedneck on March 06, 2019, 07:20:30 AM »
19
General / Re: This Old Military Rifle
« Last post by Henry Bowman on March 05, 2019, 02:02:16 PM »
US Model 1917..........

 In April 1917....the U.S. Government was realizing the the U.S was going to get actively involved in WWI. While the M1903 was standard issue of the time for U.S. forces, there wasn't enough of them for the coming call to war. Only about 600,000 were available......woefully short of the numbers going to be needed. While Springfield ramped up production, they would not be able to fill the needed rifles in time. Rock Island, who had all but stopped M1903 production attempted to rebound production but were hampered by inexperienced personnel and raw materials. The 30/40 Krag was taken out of storage and used primarily for training. While the U.S. could start new production facilities for the M1903, there just wasn't wasn't time.

Winchester, Remington and Eddystone (an affiliate of Remington) were producing the Enfield Pattern 1914 British model in .303 British in large numbers for the British Government. So it made sense to U.S. officials for them to continue the rifle production with some changes. One of the most stark changes in the rifle would be the adoption of the 30-06 cartridge instead of the .303 British cartridge. Many thought the 30-06 was superior to the .303 and it would simplify not having two different cartridges in the field.

The adopted rifle would have the nomenclature: U.S. Rifle, Caliber .30, Model of 1917. Some still today refer to it as the P17 or Pattern 17. That is undeniably incorrect. The Pattern 1914 bayonet was also adopted by the United States as the Bayonet, Model of 1917. The bayonets were manufactured by Winchester and Remington, but, none were made by Eddystone. No one knows why. Some of the Pattern 1914 bayonets made for the British were procured by the U.S. military and over-stamped with American ordnance markings.


Both the Model 1917 and Model 1903 rifles were bolt-actions, but there were differences in the design and operation of each. Most apparent was the Model 1917’s aperture rear sight, which was mounted above the receiver and located closer to the eye than the ’03’s barrel-mounted, folding-leaf Model 1905 sight. The crooked bolt handle was another and the rifle was cocked on closing the bolt instead of opening as with the M1903. No magazine cut off on the M1917 like the M1903 either. The Model 1917 remained in production until mid-1919, by which time a total of 2,422,529 rifles had been manufactured.

During World War II, the Model 1917s were called back into service and used by theU.S. for training purposes and limited use as supplementary service rifles. Also, large quantities were distributed to some the allied nations under various military aid programs. Some were offered through the DCM program. Due to the large amount of rifles given to allied nations and the practice of sporterizing by hunters, resulted in unmolested Model 1917 rifles being somewhat scarce compared to the actual number of rifles manufactured.

My rifle was rearsenaled in the San Antonio Army Depot. Interesting that I bought the rifle in New Hampshire.

There is a lot of interesting history on this rifle.......














 
20
General / Re: This Old Military Rifle
« Last post by 308nato on March 03, 2019, 06:53:23 PM »
That is a very interesting looking rifle as I have never seen one before.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10