Enfield-Rifles.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Enfields > Enfield Gunsmithing
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - No4 Mk1 Receivers and Bolts
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

No4 Mk1 Receivers and Bolts

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
mp44collector View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: December 30 2017
Location: Campbell River
Status: Offline
Points: 23
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mp44collector Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: No4 Mk1 Receivers and Bolts
    Posted: January 14 2018 at 5:27pm
Anyone Know of anyone that Makes a New Receiver and Bolt using 4140 steel for the No4 Mk1 Enfield? Or Know of anyone that Might Make one..Yes I know there are Lots of surplus one in the world.
Shawn Cusack
indmech@hotmail.com
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Goosic View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 12 2017
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Status: Offline
Points: 665
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Goosic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 15 2018 at 3:08pm
HI. I don't know if you're new to this sight but,there are some who won't answer if you don't correctly identify your rifle. You are probably referring to a No4 Mk1,and no,they do not make new receivers or bolts for the No4 Mk1 rifles. Can you explain as to why you're asking?
Back to Top
mp44collector View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: December 30 2017
Location: Campbell River
Status: Offline
Points: 23
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mp44collector Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 15 2018 at 10:50pm
looking to make a Custom Chamber rifle with Higher Chamber Pressures then the Original .303 And I don't know WHY I keep mixing up the Identification.
Shawn Cusack
indmech@hotmail.com
Back to Top
Shamu View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Logo Designer / Donating Member

Joined: April 25 2007
Location: MD, USA.
Status: Offline
Points: 8429
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Shamu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 16 2018 at 5:56am
I don't think there's a new one to be had for love nor money. Your best bet would be a mummy & unwrap it but its going to run some serious $$$$$$$$$$$$$
Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force)
Back to Top
Macd View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2018
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 179
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Macd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2018 at 8:35am
What type of pressure are you looking at?  SAAMI and CIP standards for the LE are 49k psi and 52k psi respectively.  Many No4's were converted to 7.62 NATO which as 308 Win is set at 60k psi and 62k psi (in this case CIP is lower.  While I would hesitate trying to shoot 303B at this pressure, a better fitting chamber option such as the Epps mod or other wildcat would make higher pressures feasible.
Back to Top
mp44collector View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: December 30 2017
Location: Campbell River
Status: Offline
Points: 23
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mp44collector Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2018 at 3:28pm
A new barrel in 4140 steel It will be chambered in 7.62x54R so approx 56,000.
Shawn Cusack
indmech@hotmail.com
Back to Top
Honkytonk View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 30 2017
Location: Brandon Mb
Status: Offline
Points: 690
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Honkytonk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2018 at 4:22pm
SS barrel will take the pressure. No4 Mk1 action may, for a while, but I'm guessing you'll be wearing that bolt as an eye piece. Please do not try this!! Maybe a P14 receiver? I believe they are stronger. Any other people out there believe this conversion is a bad idea? .303 British will take down any game. Period. Elephants included. Why mess with the most perfect rifle ever made? My $00.02 worth of advise...
Back to Top
Macd View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2018
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 179
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Macd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2018 at 5:47pm
From Wikipedia
During the 1960s, the British Government and the Ministry of Defence converted a number of Lee–Enfield No. 4 rifles to 7.62×51mm NATO as part of a programme to retain the Lee–Enfield as a reserve weapon.[76] The Lee–Enfield No. 4 series rifles that were converted to 7.62×51mm NATO were re-designated as the L8 series of rifles with the rifles being refitted with 7.62×51mm NATO barrels, new bolt faces and extractor claws, new rear sights and new 10-round 7.62×51mm NATO magazines that were produced by RSAF Enfield to replace the old 10-round .303 British magazines.[77] The appearance of the L8 series rifles were no different from the original No. 4 rifles, except for the new barrel (which still retained the original No.4 rifle bayonet lugs) and magazine.[78] The L8 series of rifles consisted of L8A1 rifles (converted No.4 Mk2 rifles), L8A2 rifles (converted No.4 Mk1/2 rifles), L8A3 rifles (converted No.4 Mk1/3 rifles), L8A4 rifles (converted No.4 Mk1 rifles), and L8A5 rifles (converted No.4 Mk1* rifles).

Sterling Armaments of Dagenham, Essex produced a conversion kit comprising a new 7.62mm barrel, magazine, extractor and ejector for commercial sale. The main difference between the two conversions was in the cartridge ejection arrangement; the Enfield magazine carried a hardened steel projection that struck the rim of the extracted case to eject it, the Sterling system employed a spring-loaded plunger inserted into the receiver wall.

The results of the trials that were conducted on the L8 series rifles were mixed and the British Government and the Ministry of Defence decided not to convert their existing stocks of Lee–Enfield No. 4 rifles to 7.62×51mm NATO. Despite this, the British learned from the results of the L8 test program and used them in successfully converting their stocks of No. 4 (T) sniper rifles to 7.62×51mm NATO, which led to the creation of the L42A1 series sniper rifles.[79]

In the late 1960s, RSAF Enfield entered the commercial market by producing No.4-based 7.62×51mm rifles for sale. The products were marketed under alliterative names e.g. Enfield Envoy, a rifle intended for civilian competition target shooting and Enfield Enforcer, a rifle fitted with a Pecar telescopic sight to suit the requirements of police firearms teams.

Maximum NATO pressure for the 7.62x51 is 60,191 PSI. Every converted rifle had to be proofed at 25% over operating pressure in accordance with CIP standards.
Back to Top
SW28fan View Drop Down
Special Member
Special Member
Avatar
Donating Member

Joined: July 02 2007
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 2320
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SW28fan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2018 at 8:30pm
Well one could be  made in wax on a 3D Printer in wax and then an investment cast could be made, though sintering technology is getting better and better every day.  I am the 3D printing guy at work.
I actually have a small one on my desk.
 
I have actually talked to this fellow:
Have a Nice Day
If already having a nice day please disregard
Back to Top
Macd View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2018
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 179
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Macd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 28 2018 at 8:48pm
I am embarrassed to admit I forgot about the Dominion of Canada Rifle Association program for members to have No. 4's converted to 7.62 NATO at the Long Branch/Canadian Arsenals Limited factory in the 1960's.  IIRC several thousand were so changed over but as single shot only. 
Back to Top
Stanforth View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 08 2017
Location: Oxford England
Status: Offline
Points: 183
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stanforth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 29 2018 at 3:40am
Originally posted by mp44collector mp44collector wrote:

looking to make a Custom Chamber rifle with Higher Chamber Pressures then the Original .303 And I don't know WHY I keep mixing up the Identification.
 
DON'T DO IT!!!
The No.4 is a superb action and calibre. .762 is a fine calibre for the actions made for it. BUT there were accidents 2when the conversions started in the mid 1950's and later.
 I have an Enfield Envoy made in .762 NATO but I am aware of the danger of using hot .308 loads.
You wouldn't put a hot smokeless load through a Trapdoor Springfield, would you?
Sit down in a warm dark room and think about it. Talk to your nearest and dearest, they might want to increase your life insurance.
Life.. a sexually transmitted condition that is invariably fatal.
Back to Top
Macd View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2018
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 179
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Macd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 29 2018 at 7:54am
First let me say that caution is always required when dealing with firearms and I agree with anyone and everyone who reminds us of this.

I believe the OP was considering a 7.62x54R, (CIP 57k)  This pressure compares with the the .303B (CIP 53k) and the 7.62 NATO (CIP 60k) or within your caution to use milder 308 loads.  Interestingly CIP lists both the 303B and 7.62x54R calibres at 46K CUP. I have never seen or heard of this specific calibre change being done before but it may be a feasible if one has access to the requisite machining skills and equipment.

With respect, as to the potential for life threatening injury, I, the OP and others who read these forums would welcome references to credible reports of bolt separations, burst receivers etc. using commercial 308 or military 7.62 ammunition in a No.4 converted to 7.62 NATO.  New and factual information is always a valuable addition to the shared knowledge base.  Hand loads are always suspect so they don't count.

I also add that the decisions to convert to 7.62 NATO were done by competent authorities and completed by qualified arsenals.  I do not believe there is any reason to suggest that they were incompetent or negligent.

There is another option if the OP is hesitant to use a standard N0.4 action, he can secure a Ishapore 2A or 2A1 action which were newly built specifically for the 7.62 NATO calibre.

Is the LE action the strongest?  No, but nor is it the delicate flower some would have us believe.   It's biggest reported problem is set-back of the bolt due to excessive thrust. This is a progressive process as more set back cause increased headspace which increases thrust on the bolt leading to more set back.  After reading many discussions on the subject I believe the root problem is the generous chamber dimensions and the taper of the 303B case.  Oil in the chamber or on the case will exacerbate the problem  Unfortunately this is only conjecture on my part as I have yet to see a authoritative report on the subject.
Back to Top
Zed View Drop Down
Special Member
Special Member
Avatar
Donating Member

Joined: May 01 2012
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 2193
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 29 2018 at 11:09am
When I got my 7.62 NATO calibre L39A1; the local armoury was trying to sell me some .308 Winchester spec ammunition. Aware of the difference in pressure and velocity; I decided to test a couple of brands and compare to the NATO spec. The softer factory .308 was still faster than the NATO spec and the more powerful .308 was over 300 feet per second higher then the NATO. That must be a considerable difference in pressure.
I reload using .308 components; but load to keep within the NATO spec. Generally around 2650 feet per second. Keep it safe and keep it simple!

While the standard L39 and L42 are proofed at 19 tons. I have seen some rifles for sale with a 20 ton proof stamp for civilian .308. Although personally I'm not sure that's a good idea!
It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice!
Back to Top
Macd View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2018
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 179
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Macd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 29 2018 at 12:20pm
Originally posted by Zed Zed wrote:

When I got my 7.62 NATO calibre L39A1; the local armoury was trying to sell me some .308 Winchester spec ammunition. Aware of the difference in pressure and velocity; I decided to test a couple of brands and compare to the NATO spec. The softer factory .308 was still faster than the NATO spec and the more powerful .308 was over 300 feet per second higher then the NATO. That must be a considerable difference in pressure.
I reload using .308 components; but load to keep within the NATO spec. Generally around 2650 feet per second. Keep it safe and keep it simple!


Good advice Zed.  This debate can go on forever and has on the internet for years.  Your approach is definitely the prudent one.  Doesn't help that both CIP and SAAMI treat them as the same.  The 308 was my first foray into hand loading and it took awhile to sort it out so I got best accuracy with my rifles.  Just figuring out the differences in brass from various military and commercial sources kept me busy for a long time.  Sucker for punishment that I am my next calibre was .223 Remington.Cry
Back to Top
Stanforth View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 08 2017
Location: Oxford England
Status: Offline
Points: 183
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stanforth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2018 at 12:32am
I use my Envoy with my own reloads. Basicly I use Hogdons 'Starter load' for .308 Winchester and use 4895 powder. This is good and acurate to 600 yards and that's as far as I shoot these days owing to old age and eyesight. If I was pressed to use factory ammo it would be purchased from the armoury at Bisley as they are aware of the problems.
 
Years ago the NRA (UK) and Fultons both posted warnings regarding .762NATO/.308 Winchester.
Life.. a sexually transmitted condition that is invariably fatal.
Back to Top
Zed View Drop Down
Special Member
Special Member
Avatar
Donating Member

Joined: May 01 2012
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 2193
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 30 2018 at 4:22am
Regarding the original post. I'm not sure I understand the advantage of altering the rifle with a custom barrel in 7.62-54R.
Personally I doubt that it will be any more accurate than a well set up .303. Especially when you can buy a new .303 barrel from Criterion.
The .303 is powerful enough for hunting virtually anything with 4 legs and has been proven accurate over many decades in competition.
Obviously project's are fun and building custom stuff is part of that; but it has to have an advantage over the original to be worthwhile. Making a De-Lisle replica in .45 for example would be a great project if you have a receiver and bolt just waiting to be re-born!
Just my personal opinion. Either way I'd still be interested to see how the project ends up.

It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice!
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.05
Copyright ©2001-2016 Web Wiz Ltd.