PDA

View Full Version : Really interested in Enfields


jcaoloveshine
03-23-2010, 12:07 AM
Having been able to shoot an Enfield two days ago, I'm really interested in them now, the No.4s having caught my eye.

I really loved the micrometer sights on there, hugest complaint I ever had about shooting milsurps was v notch sights on some guns, but with the Enfield it seems very intuitive.

What sort of accuracy potential do these rifles hold? Now I know with all the surp out there (Pakistani etc) 4MOA is probably typical, but how accurate can these rifles get? It seems like most of these Enfield No. 4 rifles run in the 250-300 range.

I also have a question about the micrometer sights, how exactly do they work? Like let's say I'm zeroed at 100, do I turn it a certain number of revolutions to get to 300, 400 etc like an AR15 sight using battle zero?

littlejake
03-23-2010, 5:13 AM
There are two types of micrometer sights that I know of on Enfield No 4's -- one is a milled sight and the other stamped. The milled sight flips up and has a smaller aperature -- it is marked off in yards. The No 4 is capable of accuracy that is as good as you can aim it.

I have seen some No 4 MkII's for sale in the past couple of years that date to 1955 and are still in mummy wrap.

The jungle carbine (Rifle No 5) is a bit less accurate due to "firing a bullet through a funnel" -- the fixed flash suppressor.

You might consider getting Stratton's book on No 4 and No5 rifles -- available in paperback on Amazon for $19.95. It's a must have for the Enfield collector.

http://www.amazon.com/British-Enfield-Rifles-Lee-Enfield-Collectors/dp/1882391241/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1269349905&sr=8-2

SKSer
03-23-2010, 5:28 AM
I actually just took my Enfield out the other day, Its a no1 mark III, I havnt fired it in almost 10 years. I was thinking about selling it, but it was the first gun ive owned. I finally sucked it up and bought 60 rounds of ammo for $90:eek:, but I also bought the reloading dies for it ;). It is a fun rifle, when I got mine, 13 years ago, it was $89 from Big 5 and the surplus ammo was like $12.00 per box of 30. With Iron sights at 100 yards I was shooting about 3-4inch groups. I only shot 2 different 3 shot groups, and that was rested on a sand bag on a rickity table. I didnt put that much time into really trying to see the accuracy potential. Im guessing 2-3 inch groups at 100 yards would be the fair. The cool thing about them is that the grouping doesnt open up that much the farther you go out. I was watching a video on youtube and there was a guy on there shooting like 4-5 inch groups at 600 yards (thats another reason why I kept it).

UPDATE: its actually like 5-6" groups at 600 yards, here is the video:

NHcLPRQIBjw

Dr. Peter Venkman
03-23-2010, 11:35 AM
Micrometer sights are not the standard ones used. My No.4 Mk I has two plain-jane flip up peep sights set at 300 and 600 yards, respectively. The SMLE (No.1 Mk III) makes it easier to shoot at 100 yards; I think the lowest sight setting is 200. It has been awhile since I have been able to take them to the range (or just go to the range in general). I couldn't tell you how those micrometer sights work, unfortunately. No experience with them.

Milsurp Collector
03-23-2010, 12:13 PM
hugest complaint I ever had about shooting milsurps was v notch sights on some guns

There are several milsurp rifles that don't have V-notch sights

M1917 Enfield
http://www.freewebs.com/historyofww2/m1917%20enfield.jpg

M1903A3
http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x297/parallax_2007/m1903a3.jpg

M1 (Garand) Rifle
http://eagle-squad.webpark.pl/img/amer/M1_Garand.jpg

M1 Carbine
http://historydocumented.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/m1carbine.jpg

Dr. Peter Venkman
03-23-2010, 12:34 PM
Pointing out the five or so milsurp rifles that do have peep sights is not going to change the fact that most do not. Not sure what the point of that post was.

Argonaut
03-23-2010, 12:42 PM
The M1917 ( Enfield) is superior to the Lee Enfields. It cocks on the opening, 1s 30-06 caliber and has vastly superior sights. There is a 303 British version called the P14. These guns were built on stolen patents from Mauser and are the basis for the modern Remington 700 rifles. I have several, one sporterized to 458 Win Mag. The 1917 was the most common rifle with the US troops in the WW1 battlefields.

paul0660
03-23-2010, 12:44 PM
Pointing out the five or so milsurp rifles that do have peep sights is not going to change the fact that most do not. Not sure what the point of that post was.

True, but they were nice pics.

I have always wondered about the difference in accuracy between the 2 groove #4mk1 and the 5 groove.........my two groove still came with the 300/600 peep sight, but I wasn't going to scare anyone at 600 yards.

Milsurp Collector
03-23-2010, 1:06 PM
Pointing out the five or so milsurp rifles that do have peep sights is not going to change the fact that most do not. Not sure what the point of that post was.

Just making him aware of other milsurps that don't have V-notch sites in case he hasn't considered them.

FMJBT
03-23-2010, 3:35 PM
The M1917 ( Enfield) is superior to the Lee Enfields. It cocks on the opening, 1s 30-06 caliber and has vastly superior sights.

The 30-06 is definitely a harder hitting round than the 303, but I've always prefered the lightning fast cock-on-closing, rear locking lug action of the No. 4 to the Mauser type action on the 1917's. Likewise with the flip up micrometer sights on the No.4's, I've always considered them to be some of the best battle rifle sights ever made.

smle-man
03-23-2010, 6:08 PM
http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff237/smle-man/4mk2303withtarget003.jpg

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff237/smle-man/4mk2303withtarget001.jpg

5 round group with a fouling shot (intentionally low) with a #4mk2 and S&B ball; 100 yds from a bench. A #4 in good shape, properly bedded with quality ammo is a very accurate rifle.

Also:

the 1917 and the P14 cock on closing not on opening unless a Numrich conversion was installed in the bolt. The standard sight for the #4 series is the Mk1 click adjustable sight. The two position peep was a WW2 expedient. The stamped adjustable sight was another WW2 expedient retained by Long Branch for post war production.

Pthfndr
03-23-2010, 7:13 PM
Most war time No4 rifles came with the flip type "L" peep sight. But the rear bridge is the same size as those that used the flip up micrometer sight. Numrich sells the micrometer sight for the carbine, which is only graduated to 800 meters. But otherwise it's the same as the micrometer sight that can be found on the No4 MkI/Mk2 rifles.

I put one on my U.S. Property marked Savage No4 MkI to use for the milsurp silhouette matches at the Sac Valley range. The micrometer sights have distinct clicks to them. I ran a ladder test on mine one time to see how much each click would change the point of impact at 100 yards. I don't remember the number but I have it written down somewhere.

Folded down

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v47/Pthfndr/Savage%20No4%20MkI/Savagesight1.jpg

View through the "battle sight"

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v47/Pthfndr/Savage%20No4%20MkI/Savagesight2.jpg

With the sight up to use the micrometer adjustment. You can see it's set at 300. With my hand load that's dead on for the pig silhouettes at 300 meters. (verified yesterday)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v47/Pthfndr/Savage%20No4%20MkI/Savagesight3.jpg

jcaoloveshine
03-23-2010, 7:27 PM
thanks for all the input guys, how much does one of these no.4 rifles w/ micrometer sight run for let's say good-> mint condition in terms of barrel and crown?

and how hard is it to bed the rifle? DIY or smith work?

i really liked how smooth the bolt was and the 10 round magazine

dwa
03-23-2010, 8:04 PM
would a micro meter sight work on an ishapore enfield?

smle-man
03-23-2010, 8:46 PM
You need a BSA 5A sight for an Ishapore 2A1. They go for about what the rifle costs these days.

http://rifleman.org.uk/PH_Service_sights.htm

Pthfndr
03-23-2010, 8:57 PM
thanks for all the input guys, how much does one of these no.4 rifles w/ micrometer sight run for let's say good-> mint condition in terms of barrel and crown?

These 2 places will generally have the highest quality rifles. Simpson is an importer and his prices are at the top end of what you can expect to pay. Bdl ltd. specializes in British rifles. His prices are in the mid to upper end, but you get what you pay for based on my experience with him. Good to do business with also. So use those as the upper end for pricing. Look at what they have so you can compare to other stuff you look at.

http://www.simpsonltd.com/index.php?cPath=350_351_360&osCsid=0ea58e8ae2642ddc70bd182ca6241f05

http://www.bdlltd.com/mil_sale.htm

and how hard is it to bed the rifle? DIY or smith work?

i really liked how smooth the bolt was and the 10 round magazine

Enfields and SMLEs don't bed like "normal" rifles. Look at my first pic. Behind the bolt handle you can see a large steel ring around the wrist of the stock. That's part of the receiver. Fine tuning of the accuracy of an Enfield is done by playing around with shimming under the end of the barrel to pre load it.

The No4 Mk2 was the last generation of the Enfield. They are generally considered to have the best trigger. The way it was mounted was changed from the Mk1.

There's a reason the Enfield is called "the best battle rifle" against the Mauser action rifles. It's reasonably accurate (a good one can be very accurate), very fast to operate the bolt, and incredibly reliable, with good sights.

Milsurp Collector
03-23-2010, 9:42 PM
There's a reason the Enfield is called "the best battle rifle" against the Mauser action rifles. It's reasonably accurate (a good one can be very accurate), very fast to operate the bolt, and incredibly reliable, with good sights.

I have two Savage No. 4s, one with the flip rear sight and one with a micrometer sight. One of the reasons they kind of leave me cold is that one of them consistently jams and has failures to feed, both rim-over jams and just plain failure to feed. It probably has a bad magazine but I just can't get it to work right. None of my other rifles has problems like that, the Mosins, USGI rifles, Mausers, and Arisakas feed reliably. The Enfields seem very fussy about being loaded just right to avoid a rim-over jam (and I use the proper technique of keeping my thumb to the rear) while the Mosins that also use a rimmed cartridge don't have that problem. If I had to go into battle with any of my current rifles that Enfield would be my last choice. The other No. 4 is better but not flawless and my Mk I*** feeds reliably, but that one Savage No. 4 is just fussy and unreliable. I want to like it (I have an affinity for British cars) but I don't have confidence in it. :( Any suggestions?

Eddie1965
03-23-2010, 11:14 PM
If you load it with stripper clips you have to stagger the rims in the clip, round #2 sits on #1 and #3's rim and $4 sits on #3 and #5's rim. I used to have this problem until I started to load my clips in this fashion.

Milsurp Collector
03-24-2010, 12:24 AM
If you load it with stripper clips you have to stagger the rims in the clip, round #2 sits on #1 and #3's rim and $4 sits on #3 and #5's rim. I used to have this problem until I started to load my clips in this fashion.

Yeah, I tried that _--_--_ still get rim-over jams.

Pthfndr
03-24-2010, 8:46 PM
I have two Savage No. 4s, one with the flip rear sight and one with a micrometer sight. One of the reasons they kind of leave me cold is that one of them consistently jams and has failures to feed, both rim-over jams and just plain failure to feed. It probably has a bad magazine but I just can't get it to work right. None of my other rifles has problems like that, the Mosins, USGI rifles, Mausers, and Arisakas feed reliably. The Enfields seem very fussy about being loaded just right to avoid a rim-over jam (and I use the proper technique of keeping my thumb to the rear) while the Mosins that also use a rimmed cartridge don't have that problem. If I had to go into battle with any of my current rifles that Enfield would be my last choice. The other No. 4 is better but not flawless and my Mk I*** feeds reliably, but that one Savage No. 4 is just fussy and unreliable. I want to like it (I have an affinity for British cars) but I don't have confidence in it. :( Any suggestions?

It definitely sounds like a magazine problem.

First I would make sure your magazines are fully seated in the bottom metal. Take it out and put it back in and make sure you give it a hard whack so you hear the magazine release click into place. If it is not locking in there are 2 things to check. 1) The feed lips might be bent "up" preventing the magazine from locking into place, and 2) The cut outs in the bottom of the receiver for the rear magazine lips (these can be seen through the mag well with the mag removed) might have some hardened cosmoline in them that preventing the magazine from seating fully.

If the magazine is in fact seating completely, load one round and see if it feeds ok. If it does, then load 2 rounds and check feeding.

If it feeds one of the rounds but not the other it could be the rear feed lip on the malfunctioning side is bent down too far and the bolt is not stripping it properly (you can see if the bolt is catching the back of the case if you look when you go to chamber a round).

It could also be a weak mag spring or damaged follower. Numrich lists them for $11.15

http://www.gunpartscorp.com/catalog/Products.aspx?catid=11954

Have you tried swapping mags with your other Enfields?

motojosh
03-24-2010, 8:51 PM
This site may help you with your magazine problems http://towhichireplied.blogspot.com/2009/06/enfield-magazine-feed-lips.html

-Josh

Pthfndr
03-24-2010, 9:53 PM
This site may help your with your magazine problems http://towhichireplied.blogspot.com/2009/06/enfield-magazine-feed-lips.html

-Josh

Great info. That's worth book marking.

campperrykid
03-25-2010, 3:45 AM
This ring true:
http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff237/smle-man/4mk2303withtarget003.jpg

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff237/smle-man/4mk2303withtarget001.jpg

5 round group with a fouling shot (intentionally low) with a #4mk2 and S&B ball; 100 yds from a bench. A #4 in good shape, properly bedded with quality ammo is a very accurate rifle.

Also:

the 1917 and the P14 cock on closing not on opening unless a Numrich conversion was installed in the bolt. The standard sight for the #4 series is the Mk1 click adjustable sight. The two position peep was a WW2 expedient. The stamped adjustable sight was another WW2 expedient retained by Long Branch for post war production.

The very first pre-ban rifle that I ever ownered was a #4 , still in the grease from rebuild . It would shoot similar groups with Canadian N/C milsurp ball.
GCA-68 banned the importing of all military surplus guns , including bolt actions from Canada.
It took Congress almost 20 years to repeal some of the most useless provisions of GCA-68. Better late than never.

Fight smart and keep winning.
:)

Springfield45
03-25-2010, 3:50 PM
The M1917 ( Enfield) is superior to the Lee Enfields. It cocks on the opening, 1s 30-06 caliber and has vastly superior sights. There is a 303 British version called the P14. These guns were built on stolen patents from Mauser and are the basis for the modern Remington 700 rifles. I have several, one sporterized to 458 Win Mag. The 1917 was the most common rifle with the US troops in the WW1 battlefields.

The U.S. rifle caliber .30 Model of 1917 (or wrongly called the American Enfield) cocks on closing just like British Enfields unless you put a after-market kit in it. This was a hold over feature of the P14 rifles made for the British. The only difference between the P14 and the M1917 was mainly caliber. Most WW1 American soldiers did not like this because it was not like the 1903s and 1898 Krags that cocked on opening that they were familiar with.

To be Completely technical ALL bolt action rifles Half cock on opening.

Mauser's patents were copied but at the out break of WW1 they were no longer binding between waring nations. The British were free to use it as they wished. The US government did pay royalties to Mauser for the Springfield 1903 until WW1 started for the same reason.

M1917's were made by the thousands (over 2 million) by Remington, Eddystone (owned by Remington), and Winchester from 1917 to 1918.

The Custard Pirate
03-26-2010, 11:47 AM
A couple of points: SMLE-mans Enfield is not typical. I've owned four or five and none of them would group 3 in. at 100 yards The wartime No.4s usually have chambers so oversized that cases only last for a couple of reloads. The P14 is the most accurate of all so if you are determined to shoot .303 get one of them. The also come with the micrometer sight and are a little heavier making them more comfortable to shoot. After that my preference would be for a No.1 Mk III. At least their chambers are normal.

smle-man
03-26-2010, 1:44 PM
I have a #4 LB 2 groove barrel that shoots almost as well. Condition is everything.

smle-man
03-26-2010, 4:19 PM
A couple of points: SMLE-mans Enfield is not typical. I've owned four or five and none of them would group 3 in. at 100 yards The wartime No.4s usually have chambers so oversized that cases only last for a couple of reloads. The P14 is the most accurate of all so if you are determined to shoot .303 get one of them. The also come with the micrometer sight and are a little heavier making them more comfortable to shoot. After that my preference would be for a No.1 Mk III. At least their chambers are normal.

The #4s made in wartime in the UK had hasty manufacturing going against fine accuracy. The wood was frequently uncured and the barrel rifling spud started out oversize and then wore down to sometimes past minimum standards in the desire to maximize production and minimize costs. After all the thought was the rifles wouldn't last a year in combat before they were lost, damaged, or had to be withdrawn and rebuilt. Who cared if they shot 1" or 3"? Keep in mind the standard cleaning equipment for the Brits was a piece of window screen mesh attached to a length of twine so barrel condition wasn't a prime wartime concern! #4s made at Long Branch and Savage/Stevens exhibited fine accuracy and #4s rebuilt or produced post WW2 are capable of the accuracy that my #4mk2 shoots. A lot of the #4s floating around the U.S. now came from third world nations where weapons care wasn't a well learned soldier skill. A #4 has greater accuracy potential than a #1; the #4 has a stiffer receiver, heavier barrel and fewer bedding issues. The #1 has the reverse. I won't argue about the P14 though. Even a worn example with a tight muzzle will be a 1" shooter @ 100 yds all day long. I think I'll take the P14 to the range on my next go!

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff237/smle-man/p14.jpg

Springfield45
03-26-2010, 9:51 PM
I have a No. 4 Mk 1 POF made in 6/1943. It exhibits most of the war time crudeness of manufacture. I bought it from SOG. I think this batch of Enfields came from somewhere in the middle east. It had a peace of rope still tide to it for a make shift sling. I have replaced some of its parts to restore it to a condition the British would have issued it in. I guess I am lucky because it is one of the most accurate surplus rifles I own.

jcaoloveshine
03-27-2010, 3:22 AM
hmmm now the p14 is looking really interesting, how much can one of these in good condition run for?

steelrain82
03-27-2010, 9:55 PM
IMO the enfield is one of the best rifles around. I love my no4

Milsurp Collector
03-27-2010, 10:35 PM
hmmm now the p14 is looking really interesting, how much can one of these in good condition run for?

The M1917 is the same rifle chambered for .30-06. The M1917 is easier to find, easier and cheaper to get ammo for, and is more historically significant (it was the most commonly used American rifle in World War I).

http://www.freewebs.com/historyofww2/m1917%20enfield.jpg

The Custard Pirate
03-28-2010, 9:49 AM
hmmm now the p14 is looking really interesting, how much can one of these in good condition run for?
Six to nine hundred, and more for a really cherry specimen. A M1917 is the same rifle in .30-06; it and its ammo are easier to find but you pay a price in that .30-06 has considerably more recoil than .303.

Argonaut
03-28-2010, 6:24 PM
Six to nine hundred, and more for a really cherry specimen. A M1917 is the same rifle in .30-06; it and its ammo are easier to find but you pay a price in that .30-06 has considerably more recoil than .303.

An extra 400 ft lbs of energy does not equate to "considerably more recoil". You can find a bigger difference than that in the way individual cartridges are loaded. 303 is a fine caliber and very close to the 30-06 but has fewer factory loadings available. If you have a choice, the 06 would be a better caliber because of greater availability. I have many both P14's and P17's, they are great guns for most uses. The only downside to them is they are heavy. I bought P14's 10 at a time that had the barrels plugged for 37.50 each not too long ago. Many were built into magnum sporters. The larger bolt face for the rimmed case was perfect for the belted magnum rounds.

The Custard Pirate
03-29-2010, 3:04 PM
An extra 400 ft lbs of energy does not equate to "considerably more recoil". You can find a bigger difference than that in the way individual cartridges are loaded. 303 is a fine caliber and very close to the 30-06 but has fewer factory loadings available. If you have a choice, the 06 would be a better caliber because of greater availability. I have many both P14's and P17's, they are great guns for most uses. The only downside to them is they are heavy. I bought P14's 10 at a time that had the barrels plugged for 37.50 each not too long ago. Many were built into magnum sporters. The larger bolt face for the rimmed case was perfect for the belted magnum rounds.

Recoil is function of momentum and firearm weight not kinetic energy of the bullet. I stand by my original statement that .303 has less recoil than .30-06 in rifles of the same weight.

Argonaut
03-29-2010, 3:15 PM
Recoil is function of momentum and firearm weight not kinetic energy of the bullet. I stand by my original statement that .303 has less recoil than .30-06 in rifles of the same weight.

Recoil is a function of Physics. An action has an equal and opposite reaction. Both rifles weigh and function the same so the only difference in in the energy produced. Felt recoil has more variables, stock design and fit, action type, the shooter holding the rifle in a different way......

Milsurp Collector
03-29-2010, 4:20 PM
Recoil calculator http://www.handloads.com/calc/recoil.asp

A M1917 weighs 9.2 lbs., a P14 should weigh the same. Since they are essentially the same rifle, there should be no differences in felt recoil due to stock shape, etc. any difference in felt recoil should be due to the cartridges.