@@matthewn4896 Be honest. The most important thing is that it's NOT a Moist-Nugget. I'd rather an M1917, or a Mauser, or a Springfield, but FFS the most beaver-chewed twice cursed Enfield has to be better than a 91/30.
@@larrythorn4715 I actually really like my 91/30, it's one of my favourite guns to shoot 🤣 It's certainly accurate enough, it's just that it's well, a Mosin.
In my personal experience, many wartime produced .303 barrels are out of spec, with bores slugging .314 - .315 usually, sometimes as high as .319. Add that to the cordite ball ammo that was once used and that accounts for 4 - 6 MOA rifles. North American produced Number 4s tend to have barrels with better tolerances, but again 3 - 4 MOA. In spec, post-war FTRd No. 4s with 5 groove barrels typically shoot 3 - 4 MOA with ball. Although with the right handloads I've gotten them down to under 2 MOA. But if you're shooting real groups (10 shot groups), because of the barrel profile and lack of bedding you should expect something in the range of 3 MOA with good handloads normally. Unless you're taking over 10 minutes to shoot a 10 shot group and let the barrel cool. My brief encounter with a No. 4T and handloads was quite pleasant. 1.5 MOA group, just under 2 MOA second group with handloads. No. 4s can shoot as well as the typical Garands, Mausers, Mosins and Springfields of the era. But wartime spreewerke barrels tend to paint a different picture (2 groove US barrels aren't exciting with 10 shot groups either). The L39/L42 heavy barrel upgrade does make a difference. If you had a similar weight barrel in .303 I have no doubt you would get good accuracy. The L42 is still a capable weapon and would perform well as a DMR. No, it's not a blueprinted Remington 700 or SAKO TRG, but it doesn't cost as much either. And with the right optic and good handloads in the right hands it will get the job done out to 500M every day.
Even wartime production was still held to the same factory accuracy standard though, which was way ahead of that expected of a Mauser 98 (an average factory-fresh Mauser 98 would be on the edge of passing the 600 yds test for an SMLE, let alone a No.4): SMLE and No. 4: 3.5 minutes of angle ( four out of five shots within a 1 x 1.5 inch rectangle at 100 feet, assuming outside edge-to-outside edge which appears to be the case). Interestingly, the partial 600 yard test was nine out of 10 within a 24 Inch Circle for the smle, and six out of seven shots within an 18 x 18 inch rectangle for the number 4, giving 3.8 minutes for the smle and 2.9 minutes for the number four, assuming that the group is circular and not making use of the corners of the box.
Excellent thanks Bloke. For me this video nicely complements my recent visit to a famous museum, where I was allowed to hold both a No.4 and a No.1 but was not allowed to manipulate them in any way, for health and safety reasons. As a classically trained target shooter, I was taught to always check that firearms were unloaded, as the first action on being handed one, and I seen such checks prevent at least two unfortunate events.
Excellent video. I remember reading about and watching a different video on Lee Enfield rifles having some goofy barrel harmonics, especially with lighter barrels; hence the application of pressure at certain points of the barrel to either deaden or redirect the harmonic vibrations.
Greetings from NT in Australia. Love the all your videos. Without starting a brawl, can you shoot commercial 308w hunting ammo out these old Enfields chambered in 7.62? Relatively familiar with 303s not so 7.62s. I have the following. Martini 303. Mk1 Long Lee. 2x SMLE Lithgow WW2 era models Savage No4. Lee Speed. Regards, Dave.
I like the timestamp to jump past the shooting, as if anyone who's watching this isn't here for the meticulous nerdery of every round fired. Thanks for the content.
I think I'm going to do that more, cos if you cut it the people who want to watch it complain, and if you don't, those who don't want to watch it all complain!!!
Took my 7.62mm No4 Mk1 to Blair yesterday, blade foresight, AJP rearsight and Norma ammo from 1982. 72.4 at 500 yards. High maggie was a result of snow in the eye and the inner was just a typical Blair curveball.
I own one of these sterling conversions with the bolt guide cut to allow the removal of the bolt. the first time i shot it the front piece of guide rail ripped clean off. havent shot it since but it is a convenient conversion as someone who loves the lee action and primarily uses the 308 cartridge.
I got a good chuckle at the "Ouch" over 10 rounds, and remembered back to the days of shooting 200 rounds of 7.92x57 in a day. Perhaps this is why one of my collar bones is significantly larger than the other... (This belongs to this clip no idea why it shows up on the Ruby pistol one. Or why this video says it's only 1 hour old to me, but comments already 2 says old...)
Have 1926 lithgow with near new heavy barrel...will shoot almost moa all day , also have aia no4 mk4 in 7.62 and accuracy is incredible....never been a fan of no4 rifles due to the light barrel...built a no4 with 10 rd ak mag shortened no4 barrel in 7.62 x39,must be my favorite lee enfield...good luck.
Hi, thanks for this excellent video, please make a video showing the bedding is on that L39A1 rifle, these kind of videos are very informative for other fellow Lee Enfield pattern rifle owners, cheers!
I recently acquired an 1955 made n.4 MK2. Out of the box it shoots perfectly, but to stay in the middle of the target at 100 meters with S&B standard .303 I must hold the rear sight at 450 yards.
I have in my collection a No4 mk1 T, a No4 Mk2, an M1 Garand made by Breda, a 1903 Springfield Mk1 and an M41b, I sold my M96 for the space on my licences for the M41 b. Of all these well preserved rifles. The Swedish M41b is the most accurate. I was in a 300m competition shooting a borrowed K31 recently, and my co shooter was the guy who bought my M96. I had a great first round with the K31, second round not so good. My co shooter shot amazingly in the second round with the M96. Shot my best score and was ahead by 5 points. The guy who won was 40 points ahead, also with an M96. The 6.5x55 along with the 7.5x55 round seems to be the best rounds for 300m prone shooting here in Ireland at the moment.
Very interesting, I have a quick question, I recently acquired a No4 mk2 1955 still in the wrap, should I unwrap it? And if I do what will remove cosmoline but not damage the suncorite finish? Thank you for the info and all of the great videos!
My view is leave it wrapped. They aren’t making any more of them, and it’ll appreciate in value. Find another good one to shoot. If you really must unwrap it, steam is the best method to boil off the cosmo. Historically petrol / gasoline would have been used but I don’t fancy cancer from using fuel as solvent.
I do like the L39 - if I were so inclined to subject myself to the pain in the arse that is the UK's firearm ownership rules - that would be a rifle I could see myself having. However I am very content to watch the Bloke enjoy it. I bet the dynamics of the No. 4's skinny barrel and wood bedding is really quite complicated. I'm sure you've explained this before but are the barrel bedding pressure points there to add an anti-banana effect to counter the barrel going banana-shaped under pressure? Were the Sterling conversion barrels basically just 303 barrels with 7.62 chambers cut into them or were they specially made? The bullet diameters seem so close that I can imagine someone thinking "it's at the low end, but it's within tolerance" and running with existing tooling to cut the barrel/rifling. Probably talking out of my arse but I wonder if additional clearance around the bullet would have an amplifying effect on any error in the barrel bedding - i.e. if the barrel has gone more banana shaped than it should due to over or under-compensation from the bedding, the bullet can strike the wall of the barrel harder because it has more clearance to accelerate in, causing the POI to shift.
14:07 -- "Lets see what this does and where it goes" ..... all over the place as expected. I had heard that people did try "sporterizing" No 4 and "floating" the barrels, and the results were always bad. And if this conversion has a lighter barrel, I'm not surprised. The barrel harmonics of the unsupported barrel had to have been flinging the rounds all over the place. I didn't think this test would show a drop, my gut feel is it's a barrel harmonics issue. Either due to a change in the weight of the barrel, of the speed at which the propellent of the newer NATO cartridge produced a different harmonic on the barrel, so even while it was bedded in the same manner, the barrel's not pointing in the same direction when the round leaves.
Hi, somewhere in the old back ups of my memory banks (1950’s) I seem to remember the trials with Bren Gun barrels being used to produce a Snipers rifle. True or false? Cheers mate. Harera
I think you're mixing things up - there are some 6 groove .303 barrels made in Canada from BREN barrel blanks, but they were just mixed in with the original production and aren't specific to sniper rifles.
sounds like "jump is what we in the States call barrel harmonics. if you shoot different loads you get a different aim point if its all quality ammo groupings should be similar.
Mike,There is an idea called editing to be able to stitch things together. As we get older (as we are) the recoil gets sharper into your shoulder. There is less meat in your shoulder to soak up the ft./lbs that old girl is giving you! snicker, my problem as well. BTW, I have 2 enfields. No.1 & No.4; what is the count of yours. I know you shoot more than I do I think I've seen 5 or 6 Enfields on your vids. Later, Matt in No. Tex.
@@BlokeontheRange Makes sense to prioritize what works and is expedient, if you get good enough results with off the shelf, it only seems reasonable to go with that and put the time otherwise spent loading into something else.
I just haven't had the time or inclination to reload for quite a while, and some factory is getting good enough I don't have to. Plus the saving per cartridge in Switzerland is out of proportion for the time it takes, and I'm not doing any precision rifle stuff where the accuracy increase is worth it
Hey Bloke, if you have the time for handloading, try surplus dm111 147gr bullets with 41gr N140 . For whatever reason my no4 7.62 conversion groups fantastically with it. Has a similar V0 than mk7ball
After the Second World War a lot of Lee Enfields were converted to .410 shotguns and I have even seen one converted to 9mm Flobert which must have required some firing pin modifications to fire a rimfire.
Wow... Nice... No clue what it is but I think I would like it. Can you say a bit more about what an. L39 is??? That tells me nothing since I never heard of it. I'm sure for many that's all they need to know what is being talked about Ah.. ok.. I got a bit more info.. the whole model.. L39A1
I wonder if the original.303 barrel shooting fine with Mkvii ammo means that the people who made the guns and the ammo possibly might have known what they were doing 😮
Who says No.4s are not accurate? At age 16, I shot a 33/35 at 500 yards, 2 2 3 5 5 5 5 5 5, the two outers: I destroyed a spotting disk, I under corrected my sights and then proceeded to destroy another five spotting disks in the bull. That was with a .303! Admittedly that was with target sights. When I owned my own target rifle, it was a 7.62mm conversion of a No.4 ( I spent all of 250 quid on that) and it performed pretty much as well as one of my follow club members 2000 quid rifle!
Do you reload your own ammunition? Are you aware of what barrel harmonics are and how they effect accuracy, which is optimised with powder weight in the reloading process, which is why every rifle barrel is individual. This also reinforces the effect of a fully floating barrel. The Americans are big fans of barrel tuners. Cheers,
I no longer reload my own ammunition due to time and energy constraints. I am very much aware of what barrel harmonics are and how they affect accuracy. I'm also aware of jump, compensation, and angles of departure, as well as how free-floating usually doesn't work with light barrels and hence why the various techniques of pressure at various points were developed. I am also rather more interested in performance with standard ammunition these days since handloads are not in any way militarily relevant, nor are they relevant for the types of competition that L39's were used in since they were issued-ammo only.
I've got one of these! Currently making it into a No FauxT as someone had tried to do it in the past and gave up.......(it already has the cheek piece and the receiver is drilled and tapped for No 32 - just badly)
The parker hail conversion looks to be a really good shooter. i wonder how it would be with handloads. The sterling conversion look good enough for government work.
It should be about the same as the 303 Enfield. The only difference is the powder really. The change in burn characteristics could be the cause of the groups. A new stock or glass bed the old stock should settle the old girl down.
Years ago, I shot with a fellow club member who had one of these, fitted with a scope. It was known as an Enfield Enforcer. He beat the pants off me, I was using a 308 Ruger with hand loaded ammo.
At this range it's jump dominated, not drop dominated. Slower, heavier bullets typically shoot higher in handguns for this reason, there's an early BotR vid on this subject with a revolver and bullet weights from 125 to 200 gns.
@@BlokeontheRange "why do revolver barrels point downwards?" I'll take a look, sounds neat. Though I had thought you were shooting at 100m here, though I don't specifically remember and have to go to work in a second. 100m and typical distances with revolvers would've been significantly different and I've seen noticable differences in elevation between loads in 7.7 Japanese if I remember right. The modern stuff shoots pretty high, though a lot of that is down to the battle zero the Japanese chose, I remember it being higher at 100 than the heavier loads were. Jump is neat, and I'm going to look up those textbooks of small arms.
There's not that many genuine sterling conversions, but the kits to do them were readily available and I'm sure a number made them over. l39's also not numerous and were for the army and ended up on the UK trade scene, so no mass export
@@BlokeontheRange you've amassed quite a collection of unobtanium firearms. Would that they'd been made more available. When were the Sterling conversions surplussed? It's become obvious to me in watching your videos that the gunmakers of old were absolute geniuses, what with the bedding and stocking up of these older rifles requiring just a bit of pressure here and there to make them shoot truly and repeatably. It's like trying to follow one of great grandma's old recipes with all the pinches and dashes.
The Sterling conversions weren't surplussed, only a few thousand were made, tops. Loads of the conversion kits were sold though, and IIRC they were still appearing in adverts in gun magazines until the 90's, at least the barrels.
The L4A4 Bren conversion was a questionable idea , as a .303 chambered weapon it was flawless however everyone that I used chambered to 7.62 nato would jam quite often
Ill keep saying this until it sinks in. The No.4 Rifle is not a Lee Enfield. It is simply an Enfield. James Paris Lee's name was dropped at the introduction of the redesigned No.4, as every single part of the design had been changed.
If you want to be a terminology autist, the "Lee" name was dropped when the SMLE was re-designated "Rifle, No.1", way before the No.4 was even a glint in anybody's eye. And in any case the No.4 is closer to an SMLE than an SMLE is to a model 1885 Remington-Lee, since every part of the design had been changed...
Manufacturers velocity numbers are really meaningless, shot from a test rifle, one needs to measure that from the rifle it is going to be shot from. Having chronographed ammunition shot in my rifle and compared that to of what the manufacturer or that matter load book specifies very seldom are they close.
@@BlokeontheRange ok……. Thank god for people like you that actually know that sort of thing…… just love the old Lee Enfields, kicked like the proverbial mule, especially for a 13 year old, long time ago now…. Thank you for setting me straight…👍👍
Fascinating. Really illustrates how many factors are in play when you're discussing the accuracy, or lack thereof, of any given rifle.
I bet someone says "did you check the headspace?" once the vid is public, lol :D
Yeah I heard the actions stretch because something something not a Mauser.
@@matthewn4896 Be honest. The most important thing is that it's NOT a Moist-Nugget. I'd rather an M1917, or a Mauser, or a Springfield, but FFS the most beaver-chewed twice cursed Enfield has to be better than a 91/30.
@@larrythorn4715 I actually really like my 91/30, it's one of my favourite guns to shoot 🤣
It's certainly accurate enough, it's just that it's well, a Mosin.
@@matthewn4896 It's a Mosin indeed. Best upgrade is to buy a M38 or M44 carbine. You use this to club the bolt handle on your 91/30 so you can reload.
In my personal experience, many wartime produced .303 barrels are out of spec, with bores slugging .314 - .315 usually, sometimes as high as .319. Add that to the cordite ball ammo that was once used and that accounts for 4 - 6 MOA rifles. North American produced Number 4s tend to have barrels with better tolerances, but again 3 - 4 MOA. In spec, post-war FTRd No. 4s with 5 groove barrels typically shoot 3 - 4 MOA with ball. Although with the right handloads I've gotten them down to under 2 MOA. But if you're shooting real groups (10 shot groups), because of the barrel profile and lack of bedding you should expect something in the range of 3 MOA with good handloads normally. Unless you're taking over 10 minutes to shoot a 10 shot group and let the barrel cool. My brief encounter with a No. 4T and handloads was quite pleasant. 1.5 MOA group, just under 2 MOA second group with handloads. No. 4s can shoot as well as the typical Garands, Mausers, Mosins and Springfields of the era. But wartime spreewerke barrels tend to paint a different picture (2 groove US barrels aren't exciting with 10 shot groups either). The L39/L42 heavy barrel upgrade does make a difference. If you had a similar weight barrel in .303 I have no doubt you would get good accuracy. The L42 is still a capable weapon and would perform well as a DMR. No, it's not a blueprinted Remington 700 or SAKO TRG, but it doesn't cost as much either. And with the right optic and good handloads in the right hands it will get the job done out to 500M every day.
Even wartime production was still held to the same factory accuracy standard though, which was way ahead of that expected of a Mauser 98 (an average factory-fresh Mauser 98 would be on the edge of passing the 600 yds test for an SMLE, let alone a No.4):
SMLE and No. 4: 3.5 minutes of angle ( four out of five shots within a 1 x 1.5 inch rectangle at 100 feet, assuming outside edge-to-outside edge which appears to be the case). Interestingly, the partial 600 yard test was nine out of 10 within a 24 Inch Circle for the smle, and six out of seven shots within an 18 x 18 inch rectangle for the number 4, giving 3.8 minutes for the smle and 2.9 minutes for the number four, assuming that the group is circular and not making use of the corners of the box.
Yu
I wonder how much of the bore was worn away by shooting bullets out of them and by chemical means.
@@BlokeontheRangewell that’s lucking. I happen to have a 3MOA skill set so I’m perfectly suited to such a rifle
Bloke
Your are just increasing my interest in these old rides.
So much history and so cool.
Thanks
Excellent thanks Bloke. For me this video nicely complements my recent visit to a famous museum, where I was allowed to hold both a No.4 and a No.1 but was not allowed to manipulate them in any way, for health and safety reasons.
As a classically trained target shooter, I was taught to always check that firearms were unloaded, as the first action on being handed one, and I seen such checks prevent at least two unfortunate events.
More Enfield nerdery, just what I came for. Keep it up old chap!
Excellent video. I remember reading about and watching a different video on Lee Enfield rifles having some goofy barrel harmonics, especially with lighter barrels; hence the application of pressure at certain points of the barrel to either deaden or redirect the harmonic vibrations.
Greetings from NT in Australia.
Love the all your videos.
Without starting a brawl, can you shoot commercial 308w hunting ammo out these old Enfields chambered in 7.62?
Relatively familiar with 303s not so 7.62s.
I have the following.
Martini 303.
Mk1 Long Lee.
2x SMLE Lithgow WW2 era models
Savage No4.
Lee Speed.
Regards,
Dave.
Any video with a Lee- Enfield in it is an interesting video.
I like the timestamp to jump past the shooting, as if anyone who's watching this isn't here for the meticulous nerdery of every round fired. Thanks for the content.
I think I'm going to do that more, cos if you cut it the people who want to watch it complain, and if you don't, those who don't want to watch it all complain!!!
@@BlokeontheRange Paul Harrell has the same issue, I watch ofc but I can see why people don't want to. Thanks for replying 😀
Always a learning experience with Enfields & BotR
I love the experiments on the range mikey
I was just about to ask "why are you single loading", and then you went ahead and explained it... ;)
Way more than vaguely interesting. No. 4's as target rifles will always been an interesting journey.
Took my 7.62mm No4 Mk1 to Blair yesterday, blade foresight, AJP rearsight and Norma ammo from 1982. 72.4 at 500 yards. High maggie was a result of snow in the eye and the inner was just a typical Blair curveball.
Nice!!!
I own one of these sterling conversions with the bolt guide cut to allow the removal of the bolt. the first time i shot it the front piece of guide rail ripped clean off. havent shot it since but it is a convenient conversion as someone who loves the lee action and primarily uses the 308 cartridge.
I got a good chuckle at the "Ouch" over 10 rounds, and remembered back to the days of shooting 200 rounds of 7.92x57 in a day. Perhaps this is why one of my collar bones is significantly larger than the other...
(This belongs to this clip no idea why it shows up on the Ruby pistol one. Or why this video says it's only 1 hour old to me, but comments already 2 says old...)
8:28
Ejected right back into the box, lmao!
Have 1926 lithgow with near new heavy barrel...will shoot almost moa all day , also have aia no4 mk4 in 7.62 and accuracy is incredible....never been a fan of no4 rifles due to the light barrel...built a no4 with 10 rd ak mag shortened no4 barrel in 7.62 x39,must be my favorite lee enfield...good luck.
Hi, thanks for this excellent video, please make a video showing the bedding is on that L39A1 rifle, these kind of videos are very informative for other fellow Lee Enfield pattern rifle owners, cheers!
There's really nothing exciting - they're free-floated so just in contact at the points around the action and under the barrel reinforce.
Interesting, I haven’t any experience with a conversion… thank you!
8:30 empty cartridge ejected into the box of ammo, that made my day 😄
This actaully happens to me all the time. That's why I always close the box of ammo
I was shooting no 4s when I was ten in the army cadets then the Bren loved them 1960s
It's almost like the shooter is just as important at the rifle. Knowing how to shoot with your rifle is how you really achieve precision, accuracy.
That is very true
Great review and there’s a cool way about you. Have you seen 9 hole reviews? Maybe try a similar concept to those guys, that would be fun.
I recently acquired an 1955 made n.4 MK2.
Out of the box it shoots perfectly, but to stay in the middle of the target at 100 meters with S&B standard .303 I must hold the rear sight at 450 yards.
Could you possibly do a range test on the Ishapore 7.62 2A1 Lee Enfield ? It's one of my favorite rifles !
If I could get my hands on one, yes.
Cornet at Brussels has them
I have in my collection a No4 mk1 T, a No4 Mk2, an M1 Garand made by Breda, a 1903 Springfield Mk1 and an M41b, I sold my M96 for the space on my licences for the M41 b. Of all these well preserved rifles. The Swedish M41b is the most accurate. I was in a 300m competition shooting a borrowed K31 recently, and my co shooter was the guy who bought my M96. I had a great first round with the K31, second round not so good. My co shooter shot amazingly in the second round with the M96. Shot my best score and was ahead by 5 points. The guy who won was 40 points ahead, also with an M96. The 6.5x55 along with the 7.5x55 round seems to be the best rounds for 300m prone shooting here in Ireland at the moment.
Exactly what the other blokes at the range experience here in Belgium. 6,5 Swedish first, 7,5 Swiss second. The rest behind it.
Very interesting, I have a quick question, I recently acquired a No4 mk2 1955 still in the wrap, should I unwrap it? And if I do what will remove cosmoline but not damage the suncorite finish? Thank you for the info and all of the great videos!
My view is leave it wrapped. They aren’t making any more of them, and it’ll appreciate in value. Find another good one to shoot. If you really must unwrap it, steam is the best method to boil off the cosmo. Historically petrol / gasoline would have been used but I don’t fancy cancer from using fuel as solvent.
What Enfield owners and Mosin owners have in common: packing random stuff around parts of the barrel to get better accuracy. Fascinating as always!
I do like the L39 - if I were so inclined to subject myself to the pain in the arse that is the UK's firearm ownership rules - that would be a rifle I could see myself having.
However I am very content to watch the Bloke enjoy it.
I bet the dynamics of the No. 4's skinny barrel and wood bedding is really quite complicated. I'm sure you've explained this before but are the barrel bedding pressure points there to add an anti-banana effect to counter the barrel going banana-shaped under pressure?
Were the Sterling conversion barrels basically just 303 barrels with 7.62 chambers cut into them or were they specially made? The bullet diameters seem so close that I can imagine someone thinking "it's at the low end, but it's within tolerance" and running with existing tooling to cut the barrel/rifling.
Probably talking out of my arse but I wonder if additional clearance around the bullet would have an amplifying effect on any error in the barrel bedding - i.e. if the barrel has gone more banana shaped than it should due to over or under-compensation from the bedding, the bullet can strike the wall of the barrel harder because it has more clearance to accelerate in, causing the POI to shift.
They're proper 7.62 barrels
Well bang goes that hypothesis then unles Sterling put particularly sloppy barrels on 🤣
14:07 -- "Lets see what this does and where it goes" ..... all over the place as expected. I had heard that people did try "sporterizing" No 4 and "floating" the barrels, and the results were always bad. And if this conversion has a lighter barrel, I'm not surprised. The barrel harmonics of the unsupported barrel had to have been flinging the rounds all over the place.
I didn't think this test would show a drop, my gut feel is it's a barrel harmonics issue. Either due to a change in the weight of the barrel, of the speed at which the propellent of the newer NATO cartridge produced a different harmonic on the barrel, so even while it was bedded in the same manner, the barrel's not pointing in the same direction when the round leaves.
Returning to the music track background i think the archers theme covers this episode....tum tee tum tee tum😁
Hi, somewhere in the old back ups of my memory banks (1950’s) I seem to remember the trials with Bren Gun barrels being used to produce a Snipers rifle. True or false? Cheers mate. Harera
I think you're mixing things up - there are some 6 groove .303 barrels made in Canada from BREN barrel blanks, but they were just mixed in with the original production and aren't specific to sniper rifles.
sounds like "jump is what we in the States call barrel harmonics. if you shoot different loads you get a different aim point if its all quality ammo groupings should be similar.
Mike,There is an idea called editing to be able to stitch things together. As we get older (as we are) the recoil gets sharper into your shoulder. There is less meat in your shoulder to soak up the ft./lbs that old girl is giving you! snicker, my problem as well. BTW, I have 2 enfields. No.1 & No.4; what is the count of yours. I know you shoot more than I do I think I've seen 5 or 6 Enfields on your vids. Later, Matt in No. Tex.
Nice
It's resonance and harmonics.
Hey Mike, slightly off topic, but do you hand load any of your centerfire ammo, or do you just run commercial/market available surplus?
I used to handload a lot, but I haven't loaded a single cartridge for years now...
@@BlokeontheRange Makes sense to prioritize what works and is expedient, if you get good enough results with off the shelf, it only seems reasonable to go with that and put the time otherwise spent loading into something else.
I just haven't had the time or inclination to reload for quite a while, and some factory is getting good enough I don't have to. Plus the saving per cartridge in Switzerland is out of proportion for the time it takes, and I'm not doing any precision rifle stuff where the accuracy increase is worth it
Aloha; well done! Keep up the great work. Mahalo
Hey Bloke, if you have the time for handloading, try surplus dm111 147gr bullets with 41gr N140 .
For whatever reason my no4 7.62 conversion groups fantastically with it. Has a similar V0 than mk7ball
Don’t think so. Look at that 180 gr S&B grouping
After the Second World War a lot of Lee Enfields were converted to .410 shotguns and I have even seen one converted to 9mm Flobert which must have required some firing pin modifications to fire a rimfire.
Very interesting.
I have been out of the shooting world now for 15 years would love to start again did it fot 30 years probably now to old 67
You keep reminding me how badly I want an L39 and an L42...
Try it with a Ishaphore 2A1. Mine shoots 1.5 moa. Barrel harmonics causing difference.
Huzzah! Reminds me of shooting my 8mm and being beat about.
Wow... Nice... No clue what it is but I think I would like it.
Can you say a bit more about what an. L39 is???
That tells me nothing since I never heard of it. I'm sure for many that's all they need to know what is being talked about
Ah.. ok.. I got a bit more info.. the whole model.. L39A1
ruclips.net/video/dy4WilzcLMY/видео.html
I wonder if the original.303 barrel shooting fine with Mkvii ammo means that the people who made the guns and the ammo possibly might have known what they were doing 😮
Who says No.4s are not accurate? At age 16, I shot a 33/35 at 500 yards, 2 2 3 5 5 5 5 5 5, the two outers: I destroyed a spotting disk, I under corrected my sights and then proceeded to destroy another five spotting disks in the bull. That was with a .303! Admittedly that was with target sights. When I owned my own target rifle, it was a 7.62mm conversion of a No.4 ( I spent all of 250 quid on that) and it performed pretty much as well as one of my follow club members 2000 quid rifle!
Americans say it mostly...
Do you reload your own ammunition?
Are you aware of what barrel harmonics are and how they effect accuracy, which is optimised with powder weight in the reloading process, which is why every rifle barrel is individual. This also reinforces the effect of a fully floating barrel.
The Americans are big fans of barrel tuners.
Cheers,
I no longer reload my own ammunition due to time and energy constraints. I am very much aware of what barrel harmonics are and how they affect accuracy. I'm also aware of jump, compensation, and angles of departure, as well as how free-floating usually doesn't work with light barrels and hence why the various techniques of pressure at various points were developed. I am also rather more interested in performance with standard ammunition these days since handloads are not in any way militarily relevant, nor are they relevant for the types of competition that L39's were used in since they were issued-ammo only.
I've got one of these! Currently making it into a No FauxT as someone had tried to do it in the past and gave up.......(it already has the cheek piece and the receiver is drilled and tapped for No 32 - just badly)
The parker hail conversion looks to be a really good shooter. i wonder how it would be with handloads. The sterling conversion look good enough for government work.
It should be about the same as the 303 Enfield. The only difference is the powder really. The change in burn characteristics could be the cause of the groups. A new stock or glass bed the old stock should settle the old girl down.
Very interesting...
S&B makes the best ammo for the money, period.
Is Switzerland soon going to ban guns like here in Australia can you still own a semi auto and full auto over there?
no, it's not about to ban guns. We still have an absolute right to own semiauto and in my canton you can own full auto with no problems
@@BlokeontheRangeamazing
Why no rear bag?
I would think you would be getting shooter fatugue
Years ago, I shot with a fellow club member who had one of these, fitted with a scope. It was known as an Enfield Enforcer. He beat the pants off me, I was using a 308 Ruger with hand loaded ammo.
An Enfield Enforcer is the scoped counterpart of the L39 there, with a Monte Carlo butt.
It would've been really strange if a faster projectile was shooting significantly lower, so this isn't super surprising, but it's good to confirm.
At this range it's jump dominated, not drop dominated. Slower, heavier bullets typically shoot higher in handguns for this reason, there's an early BotR vid on this subject with a revolver and bullet weights from 125 to 200 gns.
@@BlokeontheRange "why do revolver barrels point downwards?"
I'll take a look, sounds neat. Though I had thought you were shooting at 100m here, though I don't specifically remember and have to go to work in a second. 100m and typical distances with revolvers would've been significantly different and I've seen noticable differences in elevation between loads in 7.7 Japanese if I remember right. The modern stuff shoots pretty high, though a lot of that is down to the battle zero the Japanese chose, I remember it being higher at 100 than the heavier loads were.
Jump is neat, and I'm going to look up those textbooks of small arms.
I'm shooting at 50m in this video :)
Do these shoot worst then the Ishapore 2A1 rifles?
Now do it for an ishapore 308!!
Why not load the mags .Many years ago we never loaded individually To help keep your aim ???
5:55
"And I'm loading from the box just to keep the rate of fire down, so that it doesn't get too warm."
So did you happen to trade away the proper sight on the rifle, or did you happen to have a different one at some point?
Not sure what you mean... I've never seen a Sterling conversion with anything other than a standard rearsight.
@@BlokeontheRange Oh whoops I misunderstood you
Were the Srerling conversions or the L39s imported to the US?
There's not that many genuine sterling conversions, but the kits to do them were readily available and I'm sure a number made them over. l39's also not numerous and were for the army and ended up on the UK trade scene, so no mass export
@@BlokeontheRange you've amassed quite a collection of unobtanium firearms. Would that they'd been made more available. When were the Sterling conversions surplussed?
It's become obvious to me in watching your videos that the gunmakers of old were absolute geniuses, what with the bedding and stocking up of these older rifles requiring just a bit of pressure here and there to make them shoot truly and repeatably. It's like trying to follow one of great grandma's old recipes with all the pinches and dashes.
The Sterling conversions weren't surplussed, only a few thousand were made, tops. Loads of the conversion kits were sold though, and IIRC they were still appearing in adverts in gun magazines until the 90's, at least the barrels.
modern bolties may be better but man, id kill for a MADE TODAY No.1 MK.3 with all the bells and whistles but in 308
Conclusion ? The whole 7.62 NATO conversion should have been : everything to 303 British .😅
If that doesn't work well... I'll.... TAP TAP TAP TAP...
A other example..
An you please let me know what that is supposed to mean???
The L4A4 Bren conversion was a questionable idea , as a .303 chambered weapon it was flawless however everyone that I used chambered to 7.62 nato would jam quite often
You're literally the first person I've ever seen claim that... I've heard nothing but praise from those who used the L4 in service.
"Real Money" lol
Ill keep saying this until it sinks in.
The No.4 Rifle is not a Lee Enfield. It is simply an Enfield. James Paris Lee's name was dropped at the introduction of the redesigned No.4, as every single part of the design had been changed.
If you want to be a terminology autist, the "Lee" name was dropped when the SMLE was re-designated "Rifle, No.1", way before the No.4 was even a glint in anybody's eye. And in any case the No.4 is closer to an SMLE than an SMLE is to a model 1885 Remington-Lee, since every part of the design had been changed...
Manufacturers velocity numbers are really meaningless, shot from a test rifle, one needs to measure that from the rifle it is going to be shot from. Having chronographed ammunition shot in my rifle and compared that to of what the manufacturer or that matter load book specifies very seldom are they close.
your cork is too big.. "that is what she said"
I hate math!
Swallow your pride and get a cheap slip on rubber recoil pad. You'll thank yourself
Knowing things in Advance? Sounds like cheating to me 🙂
You need to cut out the panting audio..sounded like Jimmy Savile waiting to get onto a children's ward..
The barrel didn’t half move inside the furniture with just your hand!!!
Yup, well it's rather the wood moving around the barrel 🙂
@@BlokeontheRange you must have the grip of a gorilla…😁
Nah, a properly set up 303 No.4 should require 2-6 lb to lift the barrel off the front bearing.
@@BlokeontheRange ok……. Thank god for people like you that actually know that sort of thing…… just love the old Lee Enfields, kicked like the proverbial mule, especially for a 13 year old, long time ago now…. Thank you for setting me straight…👍👍