![]() |
No.4 and No.1 barrels? |
Post Reply
|
Page <123 |
| Author | |
LE Owner
Senior Member
Joined: December 04 2009 Status: Offline Points: 1047 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 30 2009 at 7:52pm |
The law has been so seldom used in the last century that very few citizens even know of it.
Gun ownership here has very few regulations other than handgun concealed carry, which required a cash bond at one time, but I hear they rescinded that.
Displaying a weapon of any kind in public (brandishing) can get you tossed in the hoosegow but that goes for just about anything thats considered a weapon.
There are many shooters clubs, only the Department of Civilian Marksmanship has a direct government tie in, they sell surplus rifles but once sold they have no further control over the weapons, otherwise its pretty much private.
PS
I can remember back in the sixties coworkers shooting their rifles in the parking lot of the plant at lunch time. Funny thing but I guess I saw more antique guns bought and sold at work than anywhere else. No one thought a thing about it if someone strolled in the workplace with a rifle on his shoulder. Some kids at my elementary school even carried rifles or pistols to school for protection against wild dogs. No one ever got shot at school back then. I guess if anyone thought about pulling a gun and going on a killing spree he'd have ended up with more holes in him than a cheesegrater before he hit the floor.
BTW
I was mistaken earlier when I mentioned the Chrome Nickel Steel, Skenerton had said that Carbon steel had been substituted for Chrome Nickel steel, which suggests that earlier Lithgow rifles were Nickel Steel but those used to test the 7.62 conversions were Carbon Steel. It could have been that some late WW2 rifles were made using a lesser quality steel due to wartime shortages.
|
|
![]() |
|
Smokey
Senior Member
Joined: May 11 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 806 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 30 2009 at 11:31pm |
|
Interestingly, the Japanese Arisakas were made with a high carbon steel. They are some of the strongest actions ever made. The secret was in the heat-treating. Here's some tests done on the "last ditch" late WWII rifles that some consider "unsafe junk"
Aren't many rifles made that could survive what these people did!
|
|
![]() |
|
LE Owner
Senior Member
Joined: December 04 2009 Status: Offline Points: 1047 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 31 2009 at 7:20am |
A steel alloy was only considered a Chrome steel or Nickel steel if it had a relatively high content of those metals. Molybdenum was commonly added to steel but seldom mentioned unless the content was fairly high.
Silver Spring Steel is about the toughest of carbon steels, being a "Controled Carbon Steel", it dates to the Colt 1860 revolvers.
The Japanese had come up with a superior manganese steel, they used it for body armor as well as helmets and even shovel blades. It proved to be superior to the US and British Hadon Manganese alloy used for our helmets and flak jackets.
I suspect their rifles also used a degree of manganese steel by WW2.
PS
Did a quick search and found that SAE 1036 is a deep hardening medium carbon steel with significant manganese content. Its used in forgings where dimensional stabilty is important, so its a good steel for receivers. It can be heat treated for very good surface hardness and resists wear.
|
|
![]() |
|
Tony
Moderator Group
Moderator Joined: April 18 2006 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 3256 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 31 2009 at 8:30am |
|
Hardly surprising when you consider how well they made Katanas. Those boys were masters at forging steel. A shame the ignorant whites destroyed many works of art by smelting down the blades for railway lines etc.
|
|
|
Rottie (PitBulls dad.)
“If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons Born free taxed to death!!! |
|
![]() |
|
LE Owner
Senior Member
Joined: December 04 2009 Status: Offline Points: 1047 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 31 2009 at 9:02am |
The Japanese swords were so highly prized as trophys that few would have been deliberately destroyed. There was some sort of incident involving Japanese officers who surrendered to the British in Malasia. I remember a film strip of the officers turning over the swords and British troops simply tossing them in a pile, These were apparently to be destroyed, the Japanese considering that a great insult. But if not for the presence of the British troops the Malasian guerillas would have taken no live prisioners.
As early as the seveties Japanese families were paying as much as 50,000 USD for the return of a Family Heirloom sword, and in recent years I hear that a few old soldiers have sent the swords to Japan gratis out of respect for their former enemy.
The Samurai blades were layered folded steel, often with a central core of super hard but brittle steel sandwiched between layers of softer more springy steel. The curved belly is a result of the two metals contracting at different rates when quenched. The workmanship was terrific, but the metalurgy of the separate steel types used was rather primitive compared to Damascus steel.
WHen Murata made its first bolt action rifles the Japanese found that while they could make decent flat springs , coil springs on a mass production scale were at the time beyond their expertise.
Instead of a coil mainspring they used a flat spring mounted in a hollow bolt handle.
|
|
![]() |
|
Tony
Moderator Group
Moderator Joined: April 18 2006 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 3256 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 31 2009 at 10:37am |
|
Believe me many were destroyed and they weren't arsenal issue they were family heirlooms. My old sensie Master Kanchiro Abbey came to the UK after the war. He had been a Colonel in the Japanese army and was sent to the UK to get him out of the way due to his political comments and actions. Over the 20 years I knew him he taught me and many others martial arts, decribed in detail the manufacture of katanas and told us in no uncertain terms about the destruction of many family heirlooms by smelting down and using the steel for railway tracks. He knew he was 1 of the guys who handed in a family heirloom.
|
|
|
Rottie (PitBulls dad.)
“If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons Born free taxed to death!!! |
|
![]() |
|
LE Owner
Senior Member
Joined: December 04 2009 Status: Offline Points: 1047 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 31 2009 at 11:10am |
Some years ago a Japanese man was murdered by his own brother when he objected to a monument honoring his brother's WW2 comrades. He was honest in branding them as the murderous thugs they really were and died upholding his beliefs.
Its nice that so many fine Japanese swords have survived, but no great suprize that many others have not.
|
|
![]() |
|
SW28fan
Special Member
Donating Member Joined: July 02 2007 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 3389 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 31 2009 at 11:47am |
|
Krieger will make just about anything, but they will cost about $275-300 US.
|
|
|
Have a Nice Day
If already having a nice day please disregard |
|
![]() |
|
LE Owner
Senior Member
Joined: December 04 2009 Status: Offline Points: 1047 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 31 2009 at 12:54pm |
|
I wonder if the enfield barrel were set back so the chamber was 51mm (counting from the breechface) if the 30-30 Winchester case (7.62X51R)would be a close fit in the remaing chamber, with a gebnerous shoulder and shorter neck once fire formed.
One might then have a 7.7X51R Improved. The powder space capacity of fire formed cases being significantly increased.
The 307-308 bullets used with the 30-30 bump up nicely in an Enfield bore, as much as .314 in some cases. Reloading with the available .311-.312 bullets would be okay, since by using the original .303 chamber neck there'd be plenty of clearance.
Accuracy would be so so using factory ammo, but if the chamber and headspace were tight enough reloads would be pretty accurate.
Only real reason to consider it is the work already done on my Lithgow and no.4 barrel (which would be a poor choice since that barrel mikes at .316).
Some australian Lithgow shooters have told me of .30-30 conversions of their No.1 rifles, but I think those used US Springfield or Browning MG barrels as a source of blanks turned to fit.
The suppression of military caliber civilian rifles in some jurisdictions lead to many unusual conversions.
I looked up the Arisaka barrel shank drawings. The T38 barrel used 14 threads per inch with an outside diameter larger than that of the Lee Enfield. Such a barrel could be turned down and threaded more easily than a barrel blank, which is probably why Australian Smiths seem to have liked to use these for 6.5 wildcats.
Turning down a larger diameter shank would allow custom fitting, should an old receiver be worn or slightly swollen.
|
|
![]() |
|
Post Reply
|
Page <123 |
| 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 |