MPI of Lee enfield No.4 MkII UF55 series

[ToineS]

As a long time admirer of the No.4 Lee Enfield, I managed to pick up a No.4 MkII from the UF 55 A batch.
It was sold from an old stock and put on the market in 1995.
They say it is from a batch made for the RAF, but I’ve never found anything to substantiate that.

Anyway, it turns out my cousin has a similar rifle, with a serial number only a few hundred from mine.
The thing with these two is that the MPI is more than 9” too low!
When shooting at 100 yards, sight set at 200 yards, the MPI should be about 3” above point of aim.
In reality, the MPI is about 6” BELOW POA...
Not just for mine, for my cousin’s Lee as well.
To shoot anywhere near the target we have to set the MkI sight to 450 yards!

Are we the only ones experiencing this, or is this somehow a common feature with these rifles?

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[browningautorifle]

What recipe of ammunition are you using? Anything other than the issue of the day will show deviation.

[ToineS]

What recipe of ammunition are you using? Anything other than the issue of the day will show deviation.

I’m using Privi 174gr FMJ ammo. According to tests I’ve read, these fly quite true to the MkVII, which also is 174gr FMJ.

But would different ammo produce a 9” deviation from the standard at 100 yards?

[Alan de Enfield]

Prvi is not exactly the same as MkVII so POI will difer.

Simply replace the front sight blade with a smaller one. as per the table :

[ToineS]

Prvi is not exactly the same as MkVII so POI will difer.

Simply replace the front sight blade with a smaller one. as per the table :

Thanks for that!
Yes, it will not be exactly the same, but a 9” difference at 100 yards seems excessive?

According to the calculations, I would need a -0.060 sight blade!
I don’t think these are available, are they?

[Daan Kemp]

Interesting. Does using the battle sight result in the same MPI?

Options: Try another ammunition brand. Fit a lower front sight. Check back sight for correct fitting.

[Alan de Enfield]

Thanks for that!
Yes, it will not be exactly the same, but a 9” difference at 100 yards seems excessive?

According to the calculations, I would need a -0.060 sight blade!
I don’t think these are available, are they?

No a -0.060 were not available.

The poor quality manufacture of Fazakerley rifles meant that in some batches the sighting in / zeroing was almost impossible and they applied for a derogation to allow Sten sights to be used (in that case the POI was 'high'), a short extract from a very long 'training lecture' on No4 Front sights, given by Peter Laidler (some years ago)

But back to No4 rifles and the BLOCK band, foresight. Are you in for the long haul? Soon after the large late 40’s FTR programmes, it was established at Fazakerley that a large percentage of fully refurbished rifles were impossible to zero due to them shooting too high. Fazakerley sought to obtain a relaxation in order to use the +.090” and +.105” STEN gun foresight blades but already there were problems relating to the final inspection standards that I won’t go into. But the same problems were apparent outside the factories and Base Workshops, in service too so while the factories, FTR programme contractors and the large REME Base workshops were NOT permitted to use the higher Sten foresight blades, a relaxation was sought that they could be used at unit level (both high sizes) and Field workshop level (just the .090 size). But this was palliative and not a cure by any means. The answer was that where a rifle was perfect in every other way, then a Mk2 BLOCK Band foresight was available.

Have a look at your 'Block Band Foresight' and see if it is a Mk2. (A Mk2 will be marked 1H or 2H) If it is that gives an increase in POI of two (2) front sight blades, if it is a Mk2 and you replace it with a Mk1 that effectively reduces your POI by two (2) sight blades so you can easily achieve the required 9" drop using the available sight blades.

[CINDERS]

Well you may want to look at these then!

Set Of 8 Lee Enfield No4 No5 No8 Sight Blades -0.030 to +0.075 Split Dovetail | eBay

[ToineS]

Well you may want to look at these then!

Set Of 8 Lee Enfield No4 No5 No8 Sight Blades -0.030 to +0.075 Split Dovetail | eBay

Thanks! I need a -0.060 blade though…!

---------- Post added at 02:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:45 PM ----------

Interesting. Does using the battle sight result in the same MPI?

Options: Try another ammunition brand. Fit a lower front sight. Check back sight for correct fitting.

Yes, I will try a different ammo brand. Maybe that’s what’s causing it…
Thanks for the suggestion!

---------- Post added at 02:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:46 PM ----------

No a -0.060 were not available.

The poor quality manufacture of Fazakerley rifles meant that in some batches the sighting in / zeroing was almost impossible and they applied for a derogation to allow Sten sights to be used (in that case the POI was 'high'), a short extract from a very long 'training lecture' on No4 Front sights, given by Peter Laidler (some years ago)

But back to No4 rifles and the BLOCK band, foresight. Are you in for the long haul? Soon after the large late 40’s FTR programmes, it was established at Fazakerley that a large percentage of fully refurbished rifles were impossible to zero due to them shooting too high. Fazakerley sought to obtain a relaxation in order to use the +.090” and +.105” STEN gun foresight blades but already there were problems relating to the final inspection standards that I won’t go into. But the same problems were apparent outside the factories and Base Workshops, in service too so while the factories, FTR programme contractors and the large REME Base workshops were NOT permitted to use the higher Sten foresight blades, a relaxation was sought that they could be used at unit level (both high sizes) and Field workshop level (just the .090 size). But this was palliative and not a cure by any means. The answer was that where a rifle was perfect in every other way, then a Mk2 BLOCK Band foresight was available.

Have a look at your 'Block Band Foresight' and see if it is a Mk2. (A Mk2 will be marked 1H or 2H) If it is that gives an increase in POI of two (2) front sight blades, if it is a Mk2 and you replace it with a Mk1 that effectively reduces your POI by two (2) sight blades so you can easily achieve the required 9" drop using the available sight blades.

Thanks for that insight. Interesting stuff!
You’d think a FTR would be ‘thorough’ right!?

But my Lee is a new 1955 No.4 MkII which, by all accounts, should be of superior quality. Some of the best ever made, even…
I’ll see what happens when I use different ammo, like Daan suggested.

But if all else fails, there is a -0.060 No.1 MkIII sight blade.
Will that fit a No.4? Opinions seem to differ, so if anyone has experience with those…? 😇

[Alan de Enfield]

But my Lee is a new 1955 No.4 MkII which, by all accounts, should be of superior quality. Some of the best ever made, even…

You have been reading things on the internet ..........................

The quality produced, not only wartime, but post war was probably the worst of all manufacturers, the working relationship was appalling with unionisation and refusal to meet 'conditions' causing huge problems, and because of this they did not get future work and were closed down.

Another small extract from one of Peter Laidlers training lessons :

After the end of the upgrading programme, the ‘new-build’ PF- and UF55A- No4 Mk2 rifles were produced. But by this time, industrial relations at Fazakerley were best described as ‘tense’ and the factory began its slow inevitable decline. Even the offer of the secretive L2A3 Sterling and L1A1 rifle contract couldn’t sweeten or un-blinker the suicidal workforce. So while Sterling got on with making and selling its guns to the rest of the world and BSA stepped in at the last moment to rescue the L1A1 SLR, the remaining SLR machinery went from Fazakerley to Lithgow …………….. but that’s another story.


Why do you think almost all of the No4T's were made using BSA manufactured rifles ?
(The quality was better and more consistent)