Enfield conversion question.

[eighteenninetytwo]

I asked this quetsion on the centerfire rifles forum but got no replies - I assume that the rifle isn't black enough to warrent discussion over there , so i'll try here. I'm considering converting one of my Lee Enfield No.4s to .223 remington. However to fit the fornt sight from the No.4 it';s going to be one big heavy mother$#%^$er of a barrel. Should I try to keep it in the original No.4 stock or should I cut it down to look like an L42 / L39. Bascially, should a .223 heavy barrel be free floated for maximum accuracy?

[jamesob]

why?

[eighteenninetytwo]

Why am I converting or why would I be asking the question. well teh former is becaise I got hold of a No.4 in great exterior condition which has fired very few rounds (locking lugs still have alot of blueing on them) but the barrel is a sewer pipe - not been cleaned with corrosive ammo I'd guess. It's notn matchng so not a collectible so is a good candidate. i'd like to teach my son to shoot young, and it provide minimal recoil and will be accurate, and I do not have a .223 bolt action.
as to why I'd ask - becaus eI don't knwo if free floated would be better than bedded for accuracy

[smle-man]

The sight is going to be the least of your issues. Conversions done in the UK and Australia involve welding the bolt face from a Remington 700 onto the #4 bolt. I hope you pull it off, I'd like to see the finished product! If you haven't already, google the 5.56mm Lee Enfield conversion, there is a webpage from Australia that goes into the detail done to convert them. There is also a company in the UK that does the conversion but it is pretty pricy as I recall.

[berg]

Why not 7.62x39? It would be even cheaper to shoot: http://www.australianinternationalar...au/product.htm

[bigstick61]

Why am I converting or why would I be asking the question. well teh former is becaise I got hold of a No.4 in great exterior condition which has fired very few rounds (locking lugs still have alot of blueing on them) but the barrel is a sewer pipe - not been cleaned with corrosive ammo I'd guess. It's notn matchng so not a collectible so is a good candidate. i'd like to teach my son to shoot young, and it provide minimal recoil and will be accurate, and I do not have a .223 bolt action.
as to why I'd ask - becaus eI don't knwo if free floated would be better than bedded for accuracy

Have you considered a .243? Still on the lighter side but it is compatible with the components used to convert Lee-Enfields to .308, sans the barrel, which you would have to order from a custom barrel manufacturer. How about sleeving the barrel to a smaller caliber based off the .303, such as a .25-303 or a .22/303? Aside from sleeving or replacing the barrel and recalibrating the sights, that would require no other modifications. Both of these options would likely serve your purpose, be easier, in the case of the latter quite probably cheaper (ammo aside, although if you reload probably not an issue), while also being considerably more useful in a general sense than a .223 bolt gun.

[eighteenninetytwo]

I don't reload (yet - though I have saved thousands of .303 brit cases over the years). I like to kee things simple and I do have other rifles in .223 and I like the look of the Lee enfiled, so I'm not putting the awful 7.62 x 39 mag on it - I'll fit a .223 mag inside the old LE mag and get about an 8 round capacity I think. My next project after this to make a Lee Speed lookalike ouf on a sporterized LE so be on the look out for suitable donor guns for me

[gun toting monkeyboy]

Ok. You are looking at spending a LOT of money to convert a rifle that has an action that is barely capable of being converted to 7.62 NATO in terms of pressure. Why? You are looking at something that will end up costing you more than a new Remington 700, and will never even come close to it in terms of accuracy. I totally agree that your particular rifle would be a good candidate for monkeying around with. But for what it is going to cost you, why not just get a Stevens Model 200? They are under $300 if you find them on sale, and will out shoot and out last any conversion you can come up with for twice the money. When all you need to do to convert a rifle is swap the barrel to something more common, it is feasible. Especially on a strong action like a 98 mauser, arisaka, or P-14/P-17 Enfield. But on an awkward and expensive to convert, weaker action like a Lee-Enfield? I don't see it being worth the trouble or money. Especially since neither the magazine or boltface particularly lend themselves to easy conversion to .223/5.56. Most of the .303 wildcats out there are not designed to work in Lee-Enfield actions either. They were meant for P-14s or early Ross rifles (not the clunker they took to WWI). They are much too hot for Lee-Enfields. And finding dies here in the US is hard. I know, as I looked into it several years back. The only source I had found for them back then was a custom die and reamer place in Australia, and they cost more than a buick. So not worth it.

-Mb

[Asphodel]

There may be a much simpler and far less costly conversion which would work for your needs.

There was, and may still be, a bit of a 'fad' in Australia for re-barreling an Enfield to .25/303, which was either a very common 'wildcat' or a commercially available 'special' there. On the very few I've seen, at gun shows or on the range, they simply used the .303 case 'as is' except for necking-down to suit the projectile diameter.

Allegedly, the .25/303 is an accurate round, something like our .243.

It wouldn't surprise me that, with some looking, you could purchase a new barrel from an Australian barrel maker, made to fit the Enfeld, in .25/303 cal, which you could headspace yourself (or have any good local gunsmith do it for you) by fitting a suitable bolt head, as was the headspace adjustment in the original .303.

I don't know whether 6MM(.243)/303 was ever common in Australia.....maybe some barrel maker there would offer that configuration......it can't hurt to ask.

Using either of those, you'd have no mag or feeding problems, and, by developing a suitably light 'varmint/target' accuracy load, you could have an equivalent of the 5.56/.223 in light recoil and accuracy, at a far lesser cost than modifications to the rifle for a rimless round.

cheers

Carla

[tteng]

8gr of Unique, berry's 150gr 30-30 (or try other cal-30) plated bullets, set the sight on 500M. You'll hit 6" black at 50yrds w/ absolutely no recoil at all.

[jamesob]

i asked why because price wise you would spend a ton of money on something that might not work out for you. i purchased a turk 8mm mauser at big5 years ago for 59.00 and spent another 500.00 converting it to 30-06. i did it because i had a major mental lapse and ate a retard sandwich for lunch, never again.

[bigstick61]

I don't reload (yet - though I have saved thousands of .303 brit cases over the years). I like to kee things simple and I do have other rifles in .223 and I like the look of the Lee enfiled, so I'm not putting the awful 7.62 x 39 mag on it - I'll fit a .223 mag inside the old LE mag and get about an 8 round capacity I think. My next project after this to make a Lee Speed lookalike ouf on a sporterized LE so be on the look out for suitable donor guns for me

With the amount you'll have to spend to make it a .223 you could probably convert it to a .303-based wildcat round with milder recoil and still have enough left over to get started with reloading that round; it wouldn't cost much more to do a .243 Winchester conversion, although getting started with reloading would cost more since you couldn't use all of that .303 brass.

For the former, you need a new barrel or need your barrel sleeved and maybe a new follower for the magazine; you'll probably also need to recalibrate the sights, which may require a new front sight blade.

For the latter you'll need a new barrel, probably a new front sight blade, a new magazine, a new bolt face and extractor, and a new ejector, and also a clip guide adapter if you want to use NATO clips. Headspacing would also be necessary (probably for the former, too). All of these items are available since they are the same as needed to convert the Lee-Enfield to .308.

Both of these will cost less and are easier than what you want. Given that except for using you .223 ammo this fulfills all of your goals, I don't see why you would go with the .223. Getting a new rifle would probably cost less. By going the .223 route you are not keeping simple. .303 wildcat is by far the simplest. Replacing the barrel is already a given if you ever want to use the rifle in any caliber again. Aside from the barrel costs are minimal and no significant modifications are needed.

[bigstick61]

i asked why because price wise you would spend a ton of money on something that might not work out for you. i purchased a turk 8mm mauser at big5 years ago for 59.00 and spent another 500.00 converting it to 30-06. i did it because i had a major mental lapse and ate a retard sandwich for lunch, never again.

A .308 conversion probably would have cost significantly less.

[bigstick61]

There may be a much simpler and far less costly conversion which would work for your needs.

There was, and may still be, a bit of a 'fad' in Australia for re-barreling an Enfield to .25/303, which was either a very common 'wildcat' or a commercially available 'special' there. On the very few I've seen, at gun shows or on the range, they simply used the .303 case 'as is' except for necking-down to suit the projectile diameter.

Allegedly, the .25/303 is an accurate round, something like our .243.

It wouldn't surprise me that, with some looking, you could purchase a new barrel from an Australian barrel maker, made to fit the Enfeld, in .25/303 cal, which you could headspace yourself (or have any good local gunsmith do it for you) by fitting a suitable bolt head, as was the headspace adjustment in the original .303.

I don't know whether 6MM(.243)/303 was ever common in Australia.....maybe some barrel maker there would offer that configuration......it can't hurt to ask.

Using either of those, you'd have no mag or feeding problems, and, by developing a suitably light 'varmint/target' accuracy load, you could have an equivalent of the 5.56/.223 in light recoil and accuracy, at a far lesser cost than modifications to the rifle for a rimless round.

cheers

Carla

I mentioned this to him. This is really the cheapest way to go except for ammo, unless one reloads, but for the cost he can afford this route and reload compared to what he wants.

.25-303 is probably the best bet, especially in terms of available ammo and reloading components (as well as barrels). If he goes with the .25-303 Elliot he will have a harder time there but won't have to modify the feed lips of the magazine. .22-303 is also harder to find, but may suit his needs even better. If he wants bigger there is 6mm-303 (.243-303, which you mentioned) and 6.5mm-303 available as well.

[jamesob]

A .308 conversion probably would have cost significantly less.

no, it would have cost the same. the barrels were the same price and everything else was compatible either way.