No. 4 7.62 Mexican Match Range Results |
Post Reply |
Author | |
britrifles
Senior Member Joined: February 03 2018 Location: Atlanta, GA Status: Online Points: 6539 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: January 12 2021 at 5:44pm |
To the administrators/moderators:
This post may be of interest to those shooting 7.62 NATO Lee Enfield Rifles. Can you move this to the 7.62 Enfield forum? |
|
Pukka Bundook
Senior Member Joined: February 02 2015 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 1369 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Well Brit,
You have certainly given us something to think about! I wonder how many poor sods struggled to get good groups, believing the service ammo to be better than it was? (Powder charges that is) This is Very useful information, inc. of course just how well the service bullets will fly when given a fair chance with a Consistent weight of powder. This should be a sticky I think! a great service to all on the forum. It is also V interesting how that light bullet performed! Not many varmints would escape that round at 200... Thanks for doing such careful tests for us Geoff. We all owe you one! Richard.
|
|
Sinnlover
Groupie Joined: January 10 2021 Location: London UK Status: Offline Points: 49 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Thanks for sharing your findings.
Whilst I don't reload, I have noticed a noticeable difference in accuracy dependant on the ammo used in both the 7.62 No4 and Enforcer. I tend to use surplus ammo in both, RG or GGG (when I can get it), the RG being a better performing round. The No4 seems to be much more sensitive to ammo types used when compared to the Enforcer.
I also have some CGC in .308 in the ammo box and this is fine but not as good as the RG. The worst ammo I found was a box of german .308, it was awful, totally inconstant, not just in performance but in manufacture - some were jacketed some were not, some were brass cases some were alloy - in the same box of 500!!! I could not hit a cow in the ar5e with a banjo with that ammo. it was really cheap though, about 50p a round! |
|
britrifles
Senior Member Joined: February 03 2018 Location: Atlanta, GA Status: Online Points: 6539 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The solution for the poor accuracy of the initial 7.62 conversions was to fit a free floating heavier barrel (4 lbs vs the 2 lb 9 oz Service weight barrel). The barrel was also longer (28 inches vs 25 inches) giving more velocity. This barrel was used in the L39, L42, Envoy and Enforcer. Tests done at the time did show that the heavy barrel gave better results with poor quality ammunition than the original service weight 7.62 barrel did, which is not surprising.
None of my 7.62 conversions have the heavy barrel, I’m hoping someone on the forum who has one will post a target in our Lee Enfield Rifles Virtual Match.
|
|
britrifles
Senior Member Joined: February 03 2018 Location: Atlanta, GA Status: Online Points: 6539 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Shamu, can I trouble you to move this post thread over to the 7.62 Enfield forum.
|
|
Sinnlover
Groupie Joined: January 10 2021 Location: London UK Status: Offline Points: 49 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
As soon as we in the UK are allowed out of our homes and back on the range I will be happy to post some comparative target images between the No4 and the later rifles,
|
|
Shamu
Admin Group Logo Designer / Donating Member Joined: April 25 2007 Location: MD, USA. Status: Offline Points: 17603 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I thought I already had? OK let me see what I can do.
|
|
Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force)
|
|
Post Reply | |
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 |