Sterling 7.62 NATO Lee-Enfield No.4 Conversion (.308 Winchester)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 май 2021
- A commercial endeavour by the Sterling Armaments Company to make a cheap second-line rifle for 7.62mm NATO by converting existing .303 Lee-Enfield No.4's, this particular example is an all-singing-all-dancing conversion with all the bells and whistles.
Link to the Sterling patent: worldwide.espacenet.com/paten...
Patreon: / blokeontherange
Teespring: teespring.com/stores/bloke-on...
Facebook: / blokeontherange
308 win winchester .308 
Наука
"Sorry, we're going to nerd out here."
Yes, Bloke. That's why we're here. To nerd out. :)
Ah another step in Enfield's long history of "inventing" things that just happen to be extremely similar to privately developed firearms the Army tested.
That was your first clue the sa-80 would be a piece of shit. It’s a government original!
@@3of11 The original AR18 wasn't too hot either. The folding stock was rubbish and the mag catch had no fence round it (just like the SA80) The bolt also bacon sliced skin off your fingers just like the SA80 did hence the funky cranked cocking handle.
@@3of11 I was part of the trial for the 80. They waxed lyrical about its virtues. We told them it was shit. They of course ignored "boots" apart from saying "what would you replace the L1A1 with then"? We replied nothing, or if you must go 5.56 give us M16. "They" were not amused. The rest of that tale is well known.
@@jon1801 From what I recall, the government at the time was looking to sell off Royal Ordnance. The L85 in its original condition was made for political reasons, it was a case of 'Any product will do. Yes we know it's not good. No don't bother making it better. That will cost more'.
@@zoiders Yeah but Enfield didn't design that now did they? Armalite did.
never get tired of enfield vids
I agree!
When I was a teenager I was surrounded by them and 4 bren guns, on a regular basis.
I enjoy the way you explain the detail differences and similarities between the "generations" of the Lee-Enfield, and how often one of your comments sends me into the rabbit warren of Google. Today it's Parkerizing....
Aaaah. I love the fact that you have a clip board and not a tablet or your phone!
Versatility.
Not only of print size.
Cool Sterling thanks for showing and explaining the updated Enfield. I was fortunate to find a great example of a 1967 RFI 2A1 last year at a fair price. Thsnks Bloke
I look forward to the centre bedding video, that should be interesting.
I have inherited a Savage No4 Mk1* which my late father used for target shooting and he sent it to Lithgow to be converted to 7.62 when we lived at Bathurst so it ended up like a L39 , it single shot using the .303 magazine, no fancy extras also
An interesting point is years ago they had a hard time getting rid of surplus, so many companies doing mods for the civilian market. I have my first Enfield buy in the sixties, without a cut barrel and paid $19.00 Canadian. Even on the used gun market today, a sportified Enfield is a $300.00 gun. Not much of a demand for the hunting rifle of the day. Mine is moose certified...
@@ndenise3460 Not if you look carefully, still loads under 700
Thanks for another great video. I have the Parker Hale T4 equivalent that I use with Enfield 7.62 magazines plus an Envoy butt and it shoots brilliantly. An interesting little quirk I have found is that if you fit a good fresh extractor spring it ejects well, but if the spring takes a set or fractures then ejection becomes pants.
It's cos it friction ejects, so if the extractor spring's weak it's not getting the friction it needs.
Great video
Amazing video and looking forward to "will it strip?"
Thanks for showing your video 👍
Great video. Thank you.
There was an interesting article in Guns Review a few years ago regarding the explorer John Blashford-Snell; he got Fultons at Bisley to build him a No.5 in .308 for the Zaire river expedition in 1974. I've often wondered if it was the same rifle, albeit sporting a No.32 scope I've shot next to over the years. Edited to add; I believe they used a No.4 receiver for the job.
I have a DCRA'd 1943 (mk1/3) Long Branch, which saw further modifications, with a cut-down forward handguard, new stock (ala L39) and a Heavy Enfield barrel with a PH Twin Zero aperture sight. It was even "Regulated by Fulton". Sadly, it only has an original .303 magazine, so it is only a single shot. But what a single shot....
interesting conversion
The DCRA No4 7.62 conversion pictured is mine. It's a Longbranch '43 with John Wilkes front and rear sights, and has an original mitary L42 style magazine fitted. The sights are A bit atypical since the DCRA rifles often had Parker Hale sights but the shooter could use what they were comfortable with.
Nice!
Oh awesome
I really like your Vids, that's a really nice Lee Enfield,👍, speaking of Firearms sales in the British Press Do you ever remember Years Ago Seeing .410 Bren Guns for sale 😂
shot gun bren? YES PLEAASE
The .410 Brens etc. were well before my time... IIRC that went out the window with the 1988 act, which happened when I was 7 years old :)
@@BlokeontheRange remember .410 Lee Enfield's being advertised. Always wanted one when I was a kid.
The .410 Enfields are still legal and around, just not as common as they used to be cos the legislative reason for their popularity has gone away.
@@BlokeontheRange Well I am 55 lol ( Old Fart) 😉
"Sorry, we're going to nerd out here"
Isn't that why we're here? ;)
Truly a darling...
...the rifle's nice, too! ;)
OH, I WANT ONE NOW.............................
It doesn't shoot that well, but I'll hopefully be able to remedy that with some cork shims to do a poor man's centre bedding on it. It did get used at Finnish Brutality Winter War Plan B though: ruclips.net/video/pZ5T3c2XiKQ/видео.html
Oooooo! The DCRA rifle: me wants.
Thank you for this video. I do have a 2A1 Enfield which is a lot of fun as I have Indian heritage on my father's side and in 7.62x51 to boot, but I am very enamored with the No 4 style aperture sights and the design of the rifles in general. Unfortunately, .303 cartridges are not at all common here in the United States. If I were to get a converted No. 4 pattern rifle, which would you suggest?
Whatever you can find! They're not common at all, aside from heavy barrel target rifle ones and then only really in the UK.
Bloke on the range Have you heard of the 30-303? Theres a book on them apparently all they did is rebarrel to 308 so you can shoot 308 bullets curious how accurate that would be or how much better of at all
Cool
Strange that the Sterling logo is very similar to the plumbing product line (budget brand of Kohler) by the same name.
Video request: we have several times touched on the topic of the stick case extractor from the Bren kit. Massive ignorance on my part. How did this tool function ie how was it used? And seeing as these are now hens teeth what is the modern alternative ? Thank you in advance.
You just put it in the chamber and fire the action off, then pull back the cocking handle. You can buy modern burst case extractors from Brownells :)
Thank you!!!
@Bloke on the Range I was hoping to hear your comments on the perennial discussion points around headspace and whether it's "safe" to fire a .308 Win round in a 7.62 NATO rifle. Another time? Nice work on the review.
7.62 NATO = 308 Win, and anyone telling you any different is wrong. If you think they're right, I suggest you look to see whether you can find different specs for them from CIP and/or SAAMI, rather than random military specs or whatever. And the headspace obsession is a mostly American thing, and I have my theories as to why...
@@BlokeontheRange - cool. I fully expected that you wouldn't be inclined to FUD based on the flavour of previous reviews. I recall your testing of an Enfield with (IIRC) a .300 Win Mag cartridge (?), that provides practical support of various commentary over at www.enfield-rifles.com/british-system-of-chamber-pressure-measurement_topic10711_page1.html ... Also, you might find the Sterling conversion guide interesting reading (if you haven't seen it already) from a short term file share at ufile.io/1rdpjpn7 ... all the best
Bloke, have you tried using the brass .30-06 Springfield stripper clips? I know the crappy 7.62 nato clips work in my 03 Springfield. The Brass Springfield clips possibly fit your charger bridge, and they have tabs to retain the ammo, atleast till you bend them enough that they break off... but they're better than the 7.62 nato clips...
I use Swedish ones. The tabs break off the brass Springfield ones too easily and they don't retain as well.
@@BlokeontheRange cool, never had any Swedish ones... ever try them with .30-06 in a Springfield?
I love the smell of cosmoline in the morning.. It smells like surplus firearms.
Oddly enough my father purchased a '43 Willys in the mid 80's, and it was doused with the stuff. I suppose they had nothing better "cheaper" at the time, but was unaware they used it on vehicles.
Could it be converted to fal mags?
I don't remember who, but back in the 90s there was a company importing the No4 7.62x51 conversion kits: barrel, magazine, bolt head. I was a poor college student, but I could have afforded one. But No 4 .303 rifles were still available for about $50, and Hansen Cartridge Company 100 round sleeves of .303 174gn FMJ could be had for $20, so I never bothered.
I really wish I had.
One of my No4 rifles came to the US via Greece in the early 00s.
I think that's who made Gibbs Extreme Carbines?
Hello Bloke, I recently required a .308 conversion with the original Sterling barrel. The ejector snd chargerbridge are missing.
Any idea where to look for conversion parts ?
Thank you very much !
Nope, sorry. I have one Enfield L8 charger bridge insert, and it's the only one I've ever seen for sale.
The 1:10 twist may be too fast for the (lighter?) 7.62 NATO round (147 gr) while the 303 fires a heavier bullet. I think this is one reason why the .303 is more accurate.
You can buy heavier bullet 7.62x51. The army sniper round is 175gr. Little harder to find though. M118LR or the M118 special ball ammo
hi, nice report. I noticed that the magazine differs of course from genuine .303 Enfield and even from .308 Ishapore rifles... are these Sterling magazines at all ? regards
The 308 Ishapore magazines are different from the 308 Sterling and 308 Enfield mags
Not to do with Lees but, out of interest, what are the significant differences between a Mannlicher and Mauser turn-bolt? Because when I look at modern bolt-actions, apart from the placement of the handle they seem more Mannlicher than Mauser to me.
The arrangement of the extractor is the big one really. A lot of understanding has been lost by the tendency in the literature to describe anything front locking as "Mauser-type", when as you say most modern designs more closely resemble Mannlicher types. They're all derived from the Schlegelmilch-type bolt on the Gew 88 in any case, and I find it very interesting that we've gone back towards that.
@@BlokeontheRange
Sounds worthy of a video.
My gosh that is cool. Have a qq where can I find information on enfield serial numbers. I have a odd 1941 rof one with a odd number that doesn't make sense to me.
www.milsurps.com/enfield.php?pg=in2.htm
www.enfieldcollector.com/serials.html
So, the only things changed are bullet and magazine? Is it safe to fire bcz 7.62 pressure is higher.
I think we'd have noticed by now if 7.62 converted No.4's were unsafe, given that tens of thousands of them were done ;)
Can you help with a address. I need magazines for Ishapore 7,62.
I inherited a Savage No4 converted by Lithgow
Does anyone make a kit to buy now
Would you ever try a Mad-Minute with a Merkel Helix? People have said it's the fastest bolt-action on the market.
Run in yell “ 7.62mm NATO rimlock!” and run out.
Longbranch alrightttttttttttt!!!!!
If I remember correctly the No4 magazine took 12 rounds (probably only supposed to be 10). That mag looks deeper - can it take 15? I don't recollect ever having seen .303 and 7.62 side by side but would be surprised if the diameter of the 7.62 was greater than the 303 even discounting the latter's rim.
You don't remember correctly ;) And 308 is wider than 303 at the case web, and stacks more vertically cos there's much less taper.
@@BlokeontheRange So is the taper due more/entirely to the shape of the case than the rim of the 303. I'd always thought that the additional curve of the Bren magazine compared to that of the "LMG" was just due to the rim, but you've got me thinking.
So how many rounds can you get in each of the magazines?
How about a video on the evolution of the shape of the round?
And P.S. what's the case web?
Thanks Bloke.
The curve is due to the rim indeed. You can get 10 rounds in either. Sometimes you can get 11 in a .303 No.4 mag if it's a bit on the deep end. You can just look up the shape of the rounds on Wiki or at municion.org. You can also look up what the web of the case is ;)
LMG mag is ever so slightly longer (but less curved). See the post on Instagram :)
This is miles better than my ishapore 2a
I remember 30 or so years ago that someone at my shooting club had one in 7.62. It kept locking up after each shot. I don’t remember what ammo he used.
While they were at it, why didn't Sterling make the brand-new 7.62 NATO magazines in a larger capacity? 15-20 rounds would probably be quite nice in a Lee-Enfield.
Would be large, heavy and unwieldy. See e.g. the tests done in 1919 on 20 round mags for SMLE's.
You need to understand that the magasine in these weapons is not for quick change with another one. Once you're out you top it with chargers / clips. So more than 10 rounds is more a handicap than a good idea
Hello,
Were the receivers re-heat-treated?
Thanks,
Steve
No, they weren't. Why would they be?
@@BlokeontheRange I read it on a forum that 7.62 NATO receivers were re-heat-treated. Probably total BS : )
Ì seem to recall that the MOD played with using 7.62 Enfields to arm older personnel reactivated under the reserve forces act during the cold war. Too old to fight, too old run to away.
Not to my knowledge. The L8 programme was the only playing with non-sniper/non-target-rifle 7.62 Enfields the MoD did.
I recall the same as zolders
Probably Squaddy-lore like "you can fire Soviet 7.62 in an SLR" and other dodgy tropes that were still circulating even in my UOTC era...
@@BlokeontheRange Its highly possible they toyed with the idea given the WW2 practice of designing substitute standard infantry weapons. Everyone thought the Gladio caches and Russian illegals were a myth until the custodians started dying from old age in the 90s.
Given that the rifle was long out of production, and this seems to have entirely escaped researchers, I doubt it. The idea to arm a kind of Home Guard with L98A1's (in the context of the short-lived "Defence Begins At Home") is far more plausible.
I
Years ago I read about these conversions that used a reinforcing strap on top of the action. It kind of resembled a scope mount. I guess they weren't used in these. The idea is that the receiver was not strong enough for 7.62 NATO?
Thanks for interesting video!
No, they never used a reinforcing strap on top of the action (which would prohibit charger loading). A very few target rifle conversions had them, but the effect seems to have been psychological rather than real, so I've never even seen one in the flesh (it was probably only a slack handful).
@@BlokeontheRange Thank you fir reply. The Indian made 7.62 NATO rifles use a stronger steel, I read. I have one of these. It shoots ok.
I've read that too... but until someone puts one on a hardness test machine I'll withhold judgement :)
A Sterling presentation...
Always thrust the bloke with a clipboard
I have a pamphlet on the 7.62x51 NATO conversions that mentioned all the things you’ve shown. They also wrote a showed pictures of a experimental rifle using the L1A1 SLR 20 rd magazines. It didn’t mention how successful they were.
See, I wish my 2A1 carbine took SLR mags. Would make so much sense, would go well with its SLR safemate.
12 minutes 34 seconds. nice
Mad Krag Minute:
ruclips.net/video/S5ycG87H1b8/видео.html
Is the mag a 10 shot or 12 shot?
10
@@BlokeontheRange I gather the Ishapore No1 based 7.62 NATO SMLEs have 12 shot mags, I assume they’re interchangeable
@@mickvonbornemann3824 They're not.
@@BlokeontheRange is that because of their different origins, as in No4 vs No1Mk3, or the design of their conversions to 7.62 NATO?
Can you still own Enfield Rifles in the UK?
Yes. Not that it impacts me in the slightest either way ;)
I think he's in Sweden or Finland. I can't remember
@@tays8306 he's in Switzerland!
@@tays8306 Switzerland.
Haha. I knew it wasn't the u.k. anyways
Comment simply to state I want one (and for the algorithm)
Why doesn't the lee enfield action get used in modern bolt action designs?
Cos Australian International Arms went bust. It's also not really a CNC-compatible design due to the raceway for the small locking lug.
Mauser action dominated due to front locking and perceived increase in safety etc.
@ Callum Pearce: The Mauser action is not as quick to cycle as the Lee-Enfield, but it is significantly stronger, due to its two front locking lugs and an additional one as a backup at the rear of the bolt. Whereas the Lee-Enfield has two locking lugs, not three, and they are to the rear. The elimination of the third lug, if it was considered in the first place by Lee-Enfield, was probably to allow the bolt-throw to be shorter, hence faster. The additional strength and safety of the Mauser-style action is the biggest reason it has remained so dominant in hunting rifles and other civilian bolt-actions, that and the fact that it is controlled-round feed, which many users find a desirable feature. Winchester's famous Model 70, for example, is famous for controlled-round feed.
The Lee-Enfield design, brilliant thought it was, became something of a dead-end in terms of firearms design. Because of the design compromises needed for the rifle's high rate of fire, it could not be chambered in cartridges significantly more powerful than .303 British. Which is one reason why you seldom see conversions of these rifles to magnum calibers as civilian sporting arms. The pattern 1917 Enfield, which is not the same design as the LE .303, however, is another story. That rifle has a long and quite heavy receiver which proved highly-suited to conversion to sporterized magnum calibers when Dough-Boys brought them home from the war. The M1917 is based upon the Mauser pattern, not the Lee-Enfield .303 pattern.
@georgiaboy1961 sorry, but that's mostly rather... erm... incorrect... And gets the timeline backwards in places.
The Mauser action is significantly stronger, eh? Someone never told the Spanish ones that, the ones that can't handle 7.62 NATO and give out ;) And Lee actions had controlled round feed way back in the Remington-Lees, a long time before Mauser decided it was a good idea. And high rate of fire was only a consideration after the Boer War, and really only with the 1909 Musketry Regulations. And what's this "elimination of the third lug" thing? The Lee lug configuration pre-dates Mauser's 3rd lug by a number of years too... :shrug:
@@BlokeontheRange - Yeah, well, the facts are that the Lee-Enfield is a fucking antique and Mauser pattern actions are still going strong. You butt-hurt Lee-Enfield fanboys can't deal with that truth. And way to cherry-pick the data - so what if some Spanish Mausers weren't made with high-quality steel? - that proves nothing, other than that you are intellectually dishonest. You like your Lee-Enfield? Great mate, you can keep it. No one with any sense wants the damned things anyway.
If the 303 was made from the start as a rimless cartridge , the 30-03 the 30-06 and 308 w / 7,62 Nato had never been invented , so thanks to the rim, ( even condoms are rimmed, 🤔)
The Japanese developed a rimless 303 prior to WW2… (7.7x58 Type 92)
(All the Japanese 7.7mm bullets copied the structure and size of the equivalent 303 British).
Why bother The difference in killing power between the 303 British and the 7.62/Win 308 is too small to matter
If you're gonna bed it, use acraglass.
Nope. Sorry, that's Bubba-level and verging on irreversible, and is not period correct in any case.
@@BlokeontheRange you think that’s bubba? I bedded my SKS with JB Weld. In my defense, I bought an aftermarket stock to do it with, and if anyone is curious, it didn’t do much to help.
How do you get this stuff!?!??!?!
Your not alowed to own guns in England!!!!!
He is in Switzerland.
You know they can get off the Island?
They got a tunnel and boats and even planes.
And even if he'd be still there he could still own it there.
Quite. I'm not in the UK, and there's nothing in this video that I couldn't own in the UK...
@@BlokeontheRange even the Swiss knife? 🤣
Blasphemy!!!
These things scare the crap out of me. While the pressure isn't that much higher, the bolt thrust is SIGNIFICANTLY higher. Remember that Enfields' headspace tends to open up over time just shooting .303. Now you're increasing the bolt thrust even more, on a rifle that would never meet modern safety standards even with the original ammo. Plus the risk that a previous user shot hot commercial spec ammo through it and critically compromised it. Just HELL NO. Run away! You're basically shooting a proofing load with each shot. These rifles are NOT safe! Run the numbers if you don't believe me (bolt thrust, not just pressure), and look up how, as headspaces opened up, Enfields were downgraded in various ways including markings meaning "only shoot if absolutely necessary" and finally "Drill purpose ONLY" meaning it was no longer safe to shoot. And that was just with original .303. They don't have the safety margins for a hotter cartridge.
Here's some reading that may help alleviate your concerns somewhat www.shootingsoftware.com/ftp/psicuparticle2.pdf ... There's a lot of fear, uncertainty and doubt peddled out there on the interweb. The difficulty is sourcing reliable information supported by empirical data. The Bloke has done some nice work here: ruclips.net/video/7bhWxFbYdyw/видео.html ... FALPhil put together a thoughtful analysis www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/the-real-7-62-308-origin-story.657834/#post-8150990 ... and if you dig around in the bowels of the interweb, Jim Bullock offers some thoughts that appear to relate real world experience web.archive.org/web/20111207234242/www.smellysmleshooters.net:80/ammopressure.htm ... You've also got another spanner flying around to mess with your head and that's the British method of pressure measurement (according to this) www.enfield-rifles.com/british-system-of-chamber-pressure-measurement_topic10711_page1.html ... as with all things, a healthy dose of scepticism is often very useful. Feel free to question the veracity of the sources. Ultimately, it's your call anyway as to what you want to believe. However, I personally find the commentary relating to the real world loading of rounds that relates bullet weight, muzzle velocity and energy relating .303 Brit to .308 Win to 7.62 NATO compelling that application of good sense should avoid problems. Each to their own. All the best.
Sorry to let reality interfere with your theory, but in over 50 years of .308 No.4 use in the UK, both military and non-military, with millions and millions of rounds going downrange in training and competition, nobody has ever actually noticed this thing you're apparently so sure of...
In other words, if what you're saying had the slightest bit of truth to it, we'd have seen loads of L42's and No.4-based target rifles give out, or fail CIP proof. We don't. I'm unaware of any, and finding pics of Enfield kabooms without a barrel blockage is really quite hard... There are literally tens of thousands of No.4 conversions of various types in circulation in the UK and Commonwealth, they were offered commercially by Parker-Hale, AJP, Enfield and others. If there was a problem, we'd know about it...
Sorry WardenWolf, but thats just end-to-end nonsense.
The Birmingham Proof House says you are wrong. It's also been proven that bolt thrust on Enfield actions is not a problem and its just as strong as its contemporaries. They just work.