High pressure warnings |
Post Reply | Page <1 91011 |
Author | |
The Armourer
Senior Member Joined: June 23 2019 Location: Y Felinhelli Status: Offline Points: 1246 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
This is the original article which had several No4 pictures included.
He concludes the article with : "This post-war No.4 action is the best of the Lee Enfield bunch but if you overstress it you risk your life"
|
|
Honkytonk
Senior Member Joined: December 30 2017 Location: Brandon Mb Status: Offline Points: 4770 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Excellent response to the article from the NRA. Sounds like a bit of anti-British invention and design, but interesting reading. If any of the members own No4's and live in an area that many get rain and are now afraid to take your rifle outside, I would would definitely give them a nice home!
|
|
Goosic
Senior Member Joined: September 12 2017 Location: Phoenix Arizona Status: Offline Points: 8792 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I would also recommend that anyone who is now afraid to use their L39A1 or L42A1 because the Birmingham Proof Master has made these rifles an abomination according to the previous article, that you contact me for proper safe keeping and usage ...
|
|
britrifles
Senior Member Joined: February 03 2018 Location: Atlanta, GA Status: Offline Points: 6539 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The only thing I agree with is that a wet or oily chamber and/ or ammunition does in fact increase bolt thrust loads. However, the British method of measuring chamber pressure of cartridges and conducting proof tests at the time of the .303 and 7.62 conversions required the cartridge the be immersed in a light oil right before chambering.
When I shoot in competition or in practice, I endeavor to keep rain off the cartridges and out of the action. You will see a few MOA change in POI with wet cartridges vs dry, the other consequence of increased bolt thrust. |
|
Goosic
Senior Member Joined: September 12 2017 Location: Phoenix Arizona Status: Offline Points: 8792 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
If anyone has Skennerton's big book, take a moment and read from page 256 to 264 and then reread the safety notice The Armourer supplied.
The two topics cancel each other out. To me it is as if two people got together one afternoon for tea and hashed out how to do,"this." Shake hands and leave. They meet up the following afternoon for tea and proceed to hash out how to undo,"this." Shake hands and leave. I totally understand the 7.62/308 controversy and I understand the controversy over conversions to 7.62/308 using the No4 actions based off of online debates and such. I also understand that if the rifle or ammunition does not conform to CIP standards, the rifle is basically trash, according to CIP standards. What I cannot understand is how a group of individuals can come up with a solution to a problem ,"updating the No4 from 303 to 7.62." And then basically 60 years later have a group of individuals condemn the solution unless the rifle goes through yet again more testing. Where does this end?
|
|
The Armourer
Senior Member Joined: June 23 2019 Location: Y Felinhelli Status: Offline Points: 1246 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
A long story, but the original NRA warning was due to 'pressure problems' using NATO ammunition. Bisley provide the ammunition for the competitions (to ensure 'fair play') and they were issuing 'latest' NATO ammunition which has bigger (heavier) bullets and higher pressures. Tight leades meant that the bullets were too tight, meaning that the pressure was even higher. Anyway - once someone realised that these rifles were prooved using 'standard' 144-150gr ammunition and original pressures they specified the pressure requirements and bullet / leade size, or have your rifle prooved for the higher pressures. Hence the debate (pages ago) about using Higher spec NATO 7.62 in 'old' barrels and actions that were not prooved for those pressures.
|
|
Goosic
Senior Member Joined: September 12 2017 Location: Phoenix Arizona Status: Offline Points: 8792 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
...and now I understand a little more...
|
|
Zed
Special Member Donating Member Joined: May 01 2012 Location: France Status: Offline Points: 5585 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I have seen 7.62 Enfield conversions for sale in the UK that have been proofed to 20 tons instead of the standard 19tons as on my L39. I believe these recent re-proof's were to accomodate .308 factory ammunition.
Personally I don't see re-proofing an old rifle to a higher pressure as good idea.
It's a bit like raising the "red-line" on your classic car's engine so you can drive it faster! If there's no modification to make it handle the extra stress; it's not going to last very long! |
|
It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice!
|
|
The Armourer
Senior Member Joined: June 23 2019 Location: Y Felinhelli Status: Offline Points: 1246 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Looking thru the old 'Instructions to Armourers' reveals a bit about the movement on POI. |
|
britrifles
Senior Member Joined: February 03 2018 Location: Atlanta, GA Status: Offline Points: 6539 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I agree with Zed. You are better off developing loads with mild pressures, about at the same pressure level as the Mk 7 .303 cartridge. If you don’t reload, then try to find 7.62/.308 ammunition that is relatively mild. That may be hard to determine since most manufacturers don’t list max chamber pressure for their cartridges. I’m sure I’ve said this before, but prior to each time I shoot my rifles I clean the chamber by wrapping a 3 x 1.5 in patch around a chamber brush and wet it in brake cleaner to remove all traces of oil and bore cleaner. Keeping the chamber dry and free of oil minimizes stress on the action. |
|
Post Reply | Page <1 91011 |
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 |