~Lee Enfield~

Status
Not open for further replies.
I bought a sporterized SMLE MkIII in 1964 at Target for $27 and they had racks of Mil surp.

In Jan.2007, I bought a nice #4 made by Savage for $159 or so---considering inflation--not bad. This from a sporting goods store in Tacoma.

The #4 has a receiver peep as opposed to the SMLE small notch which might make a difference in group size.
 
Yes. If I can find the original engine and dump the P&W.
07zero001.gif

I don't have one of these.
Yet.




Or a way to to pay for it!!!

It's still a nice plane and we had it for a fly by with an Me-109 and the ten P-51's who line up for a two hours show. Great people. Those P51 people just want you to give them a place to fly.

Happy Fathers Day all who have passed the test.

....MJ....
 
the Indian enfields were meant as police rifles so not really designed to be accurate over 100 meters but there No4s so going to be.
 
woodybrighton, which Indian Enfields are you referring to? Most of the Ishapores on the market are based on the No1, no the No4. I'm sure there are No4s in India and Pakistan, but you're more likely to see an Indian No1 chambered in 7.62NATO, .303British, or .410 than you are to see an Indian No4. There are a handful of Pakistani No4s floating around, though.

Many of the Indian Enfields have seen police/riot duty. Especially the ones chambered for .303British and the single shot .303 and .410 conversions. Of course the .410 single shot models were riot guns not made with long range in mind, but the original reason behind the creation of the single shot .303 models was not to limit range or rate of fire for police. The single shot Enfield conversions in India originally took place when India was still under British rule, and the British didn't trust all of their Indian native forces with 10 shot SMLE repeaters.

Indian production of .303 No1 rifles actually continued after they created the 2A in 7.62, probably because there were still large stores of .303 ammo available in India. This means that the .303 Enfields in India have been a mix of leftover rifles from parts of the British Empire, No1s produced at Ishapore under British rule, and No1s produced at Ishapore under independent Indian rule. While not all of the .303 Enfields in India were built with front line military service in mind, they were all built at armories that produced Enfields on machining tools that were designed to produce Enfields for military service. They are not like Khyber pass copies of Enfields made in caves somewhere.

The 7.62 Ishapore 2A rifles were almost certainly meant for military service. The Indians needed large numbers of reliable rifles chambered in a modern NATO cartridge, so they took the rifle they already had the capability to produce in large quantities and made minor modifications to it. Ishapore 2A rifles saw military duty in the border conflicts with China and Pakistan.
 
Get a lithgow

Australia never thought that the No 4 Mk1 was superior to the previous design. Pratt and Whitney(think Radial Aircraft engines) set up and provided much of the tooling for the lithgow arsenal and these rifles are considered to be better than anything else that came out of any other.

My buddy paid out the yinyang for a Fazerkaly No4 Mk2. Nice rifle in really good shape compared to my beater No4 Mk1* savage.
 
GBExpat: i believe what the gentlemen are suggesting re "whip" is that in Great Britain, the Queen's Prize 1000m is fired using service military ammunition only--no handloads or target ammunition. the substantial flex of the LE's rear locking design tends to compensate for variations--however minute--in powder charge. and the more rigid front locking design (M98 types) actually decompensated for these variations; hence the LE was better at 1000m (with service ammo) than the front locking lug design. in point of fact, rifles of Mauser design--rifles featuring locking lugs at 6 oclock and 12 oclock--produce vertically strung groups at extreme range.

this particular advantage of the Lee Enfield design has long been recognized. enough so that gunmaker George Swenson designed his SWING rifle to best the LE specifically at 1000m.
 
Thanks for the explanation "whip", junior geezer.

What induced me to join the discussion so long ago was that some folks will try to have you believe that LE groups "tighten up" as you get farther down range (not the first time I have heard that bit of silliness).

For example, if the rifle can produce 2" groups at 100yds, it will produce groups of better than 4" at 200yds.

Fact: It will not be more accurate beyond XXX yds than it is at XXX yds.

I think that this is usually a case of the people not taking the time to think it thru ... like those who believe that if they fire their LE straight up, the bullet will arrive back at the same velocity that it had when it left the muzzle. In some cases, however, it appears to simply be the result of stubborn, unthinking belief.

That is the point that I was addressing, not "whip", except where it may have been offered as an explanation of why LE groups "tighten up" farther downrange.

As I said in one of my responses:
I think that people believing the Silliness about groups "tightening up" after the bullets have traveled farther downrange has a lot to do with phrases like "the LE really comes into its own at longer ranges" which suggests to me that the Mk7s are, perhaps, a bit more stable and less effected by wind than some othercomparable rifles.

Rather than reading it as something as silly as groups tightening up downrange, it should be read as groups are more consistently resistant to spreading due to air movement.
 
GBExpat:

just to be certain we are on the right side of things. i do not in anyway disagree with you. there is no sliding curve re accuracy. the matter of the LE and its
dominance over 1000m service rifle using service ammo pertains only to that singular usage. the rifle has a certain ability to compensate for certain ammo shortcomings at one certain specific range.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top