|
.45 Enfield "Tanker". |
Post Reply 
|
Page 12> |
| Author | |
Richard/SIA 
Senior Member 
Joined: February 02 2008 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 387 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Topic: .45 Enfield "Tanker".Posted: May 22 2008 at 11:23am |
|
Just because I had not yet done one, I built a .45 "Tanker" for a buyer who did not care what type of furniture he got.
With the .45 mag out you might not realize it's a custom gun except for it's length. I've sold quite a few of my conversion kits now, how about some of you send me pics of how your gun came out? I would be interested in seeing what new variations turn up. 
|
|
|
At over $3.00 a gallon for gas, I want it leaded, 100 octane, and my windshield washed!
|
|
 |
|
|
Guests
Guest Group 
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: May 23 2008 at 3:15pm |
|
I like it ! I wonder have you ever considered the .44mag as a 'Platform' for these kits? I'm sure there are mags avalible from Desert Eagles & AMT . Just a thought
Dave |
|
|
|
|
Richard/SIA
Senior Member
Joined: February 02 2008 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 387 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: May 23 2008 at 4:23pm |
|
Wellll....
I am sort of looking for a .50AE magazine. The .50 AE works very well on large bears, so ought to be good for most game on this continent. 
It's still short enough that I would only have to make minimal changes to my current adaptor. Another way to go, and one that fits the current adaptor without any change beyond the barrel chamber, is to go with the .460 Rowland. It's a super-45, which fits the standard 1911 type magazine. 
If I happen across a .44M magazine I can take a look at that too, but it takes a minimum of twenty kits to make a conversion profitable to produce. Doing a very few is possible, but the unit price would get pretty high. 
|
|
|
At over $3.00 a gallon for gas, I want it leaded, 100 octane, and my windshield washed!
|
|
|
|
|
hoadie
Moderator Group 
Joined: March 16 2006 Location: Niagara/Canada Status: Offline Points: 9680 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: May 24 2008 at 1:31am |
|
Pardon my lack of knowledge here...but is this "Tanker" model a product of someone's ingenuity..or was there a REAL model of this rifle? I've never heard or seen or heard talk of such a critter before.(& the WWII vets that I've known -that were in the armoured corps-certainly have never mentioned them)
Hoadie |
|
|
Loose wimmen tightened here
|
|
|
|
|
Richard/SIA
Senior Member
Joined: February 02 2008 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 387 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: May 24 2008 at 2:52am |
|
It's a popular "Cut -Down" version.
Barrels from 16"-20", rather than the 25" original. Something like a No. 5, but with full length wood. Lighter and handy for youth, camping, vehicles, etc. |
|
|
At over $3.00 a gallon for gas, I want it leaded, 100 octane, and my windshield washed!
|
|
|
|
|
hoadie
Moderator Group
Joined: March 16 2006 Location: Niagara/Canada Status: Offline Points: 9680 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: May 24 2008 at 10:28am |
|
So, why is it called a "Tanker"?
Hoadie |
|
|
Loose wimmen tightened here
|
|
|
|
|
Cookie Monster
Special Member
Joined: January 22 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 7510 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: May 24 2008 at 10:43pm |
|
My thoughts as well Hoadie, why call it a “Tanker”? That name incorrectly depicts its intended use and market. Youth rifle, Camper’s Rifle, etc. It is a marketing ploy I would think to attract the masculine side of the buyer. For instance, “ Son here is your new Youth rifle or Camper’s Special” or “Son look what Dad picked up for you today a, “Tanker”, Rifle”. Which one would the eager boy rather have. Plus an unsuspecting buyer may even think he was getting a original “Tanker’s” rifle not knowing what he was looking at. Hoadie you and I and most of the other constituents here prefer more Historically correct versions of the rifles and are collectors anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
ikesdad
Senior Member
Joined: May 10 2007 Location: Western Slope Status: Offline Points: 393 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: May 25 2008 at 7:40am |
|
"Bush Baby" ?
|
|
|
Pro Deo et Patria
|
|
|
|
|
Richard/SIA
Senior Member
Joined: February 02 2008 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 387 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: May 25 2008 at 9:42am |
The name is not my doing, this is just the label that has been hung on shortened military rifles with full wood. I think Century Arms started this, and it's now a widely recognized term for such guns. I think that perhaps the original alliteration was to a shortened gun that might have been used by vehicle crewmen, such as Tank jockeys. As if the ordnance departments ever had so much consideration for vehicle crews!
|
|
|
At over $3.00 a gallon for gas, I want it leaded, 100 octane, and my windshield washed!
|
|
|
|
|
White Rhino
Special Member
Donating Member Joined: May 05 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5153 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: May 25 2008 at 12:27pm |
|
Ok!! Its a popular"cut down version"???? Popular???? Don't understand???? I dont see that many person's around here with No1's Or No4's at the least then to think or say them are/is/Be popular??......
 I was just thinking ... If I screw one of my nice Enfields up to get a reciver to do one of these conversions with ..I should get it for chicken feed?????? Say I !!!! Say You??????????
I'm thinking about $25.00 fer one????? What yall others think????
|
|
|
"White Rhino"
"Everybody's got to believe in something. I believe I'll have another beer." --W. C. Fields |
|
|
|
|
ikesdad
Senior Member
Joined: May 10 2007 Location: Western Slope Status: Offline Points: 393 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: May 25 2008 at 2:44pm |
|
There was a guy at GB awhile back with #4 recievers that had nasty crap barrels for 25. A guy could use one of those.
|
|
|
Pro Deo et Patria
|
|
|
|
|
Cookie Monster
Special Member
Joined: January 22 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 7510 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: May 26 2008 at 1:08am |
That would be the only way I would disface an enfield. I would rather use the part to bring back an old war veteran to original if I could with those recievers. Just my opinion thou.
|
|
|
|
|
White Rhino
Special Member
Donating Member Joined: May 05 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5153 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: May 26 2008 at 2:14am |
|
I second that! Cookie Monster, Its kinda like looking a gift horse in the mouth. Ya dont ask why you were given the gift or question why it was not some thing else.... you take it and be thankfull and show some grattituid for the item. why try to change some thing great when you can get a rifle that shoots .45 acp allready in production and its semi auto to boot???? Its made by Ruger. J&G were selling some trade ins from Law enforcment a few months ago. Built on the same lines as the Ruger Ranch Rifle and the 10/22 . These Rifle were designed and Built by the same company . Not built on an oldWar Horse to try and make some thing different...
So my Fellow Enfield enthusiasts, I ask - Why destroy a GREAT Rifle to make a substandard one that was never ment......
Why not try and Machine a copy of the Enfield Reciever and go from there.... wouldnt that make more sense?????
|
|
|
"White Rhino"
"Everybody's got to believe in something. I believe I'll have another beer." --W. C. Fields |
|
|
|
|
Richard/SIA
Senior Member
Joined: February 02 2008 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 387 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: May 26 2008 at 3:21am |
|
The guns being modified have been FTR'd several times, the bores are sewer pipe, the wood is suitable for kindling, often small parts are missing.
This describes most of the recently imported guns. Or they are guns that have already been mucked about with by prior owners. I have a collection of original Enfields, ranging from a 1915 LSA #1 to a pair of Ishapore 2A's, with appropriate models in between. They rarely get shot, and work poorly for bringing new shooters into the sport. My converted guns are cheap to shoot, and have very little recoil, without being a "Kiddy Gun" .22. Look around your local gun club, what's the average ago of shooters there? Over 20, or, much more likely, over 50? Unless we begin to bring a significant number of younger shooters into this sport the anti-RKBA seditionist won't have to ban our guns. They will be able to just pick them all up at will from our heirs! Appreciation of classic guns has to start with an appreciation of guns in general. |
|
|
At over $3.00 a gallon for gas, I want it leaded, 100 octane, and my windshield washed!
|
|
|
|
|
hoadie
Moderator Group
Joined: March 16 2006 Location: Niagara/Canada Status: Offline Points: 9680 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: May 26 2008 at 5:05am |
|
Here! Here! I couldn't agree more! & if ya dont think what Richard says has alot of merit..just look @ the firearms that I have been GIVEN by members @ the Legion over the last few years.They have no-one that will appreciate them.Thet're too old/feeble to use them anymore..& they'll be DAMNED if they're gonna let the gov't get 'em!
Hoadie |
|
|
Loose wimmen tightened here
|
|
|
|
|
Lost Kangaroo
Senior Member
Joined: February 18 2007 Location: Rochester NY036 Status: Offline Points: 724 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: May 26 2008 at 11:12am |
|
As soon as my kids get big enough to hold a .22 cricket..or even the hornet...they will be shooting cans at the 25...after all, my collection will be going to them in the future....they might as well get used to shooting and appreciating them as soon as possible.
|
|
|
Get some
|
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page 12> |
| Tweet |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
hoadie wrote: