Results 1 to 10 of 22

Thread: QUESTION REGARDING MR. LAIDLERS BOOK .303 No4 (T) SNIPER RIFLE AND THE H&H CONNECTION

Click here to increase the font size Click here to reduce the font size

Threaded View

  1. #1
    Legacy Member bros's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last On
    Yesterday @ 10:07 PM
    Location
    yukon
    Posts
    273
    Local Date
    05-14-2024
    Local Time
    03:02 AM

    QUESTION REGARDING MR. LAIDLERS BOOK .303 No4 (T) SNIPER RIFLE AND THE H&H CONNECTION

    I was reading Peter's book today and have a question about some info in Chapter 21. The text goes on to say that in the mid 1960's armourer's took all the 4 T's from the company arms stores for overhaul. " At the same time, the then current small arms instruction ordered that the rifle number should be stamped onto the bracket and this was done. Another departure from the original".
    I was under the impression that Holland & Holland (upon doing the greater part of the T conversions) would have ensured this was done before releasing the T's into service, especially that it was imperative that the original bracket remain with the original rifle it was fitted for!!!!!! So no English T brackets were stamped prior to going into service????

    Another question I have is why it is so important to not change brackets between guns? I fully understand the theory of milling away a small amount of material on the left body side of the receiver to ensure the flat the pads would sit on would be perfectly parallel to the bore and I understand why the pads were finish machined "on" the rifle to ensure parallelism both vertically and horizontally to the bore. What I don't understand is when they machined the brackets, specifically the areas that had to mate to the pads attached to the rifle...those dimensions and tolerances would have not changed from bracket to bracket...tight tolerances ensure the same results but why then could one not take one bracket and put it on another rifle and expect the same results....unless after the bracket was installed on it's particular rifle and the scope pockets were line-bored which I believe was not the case!! So what was done to make each bracket so specific to it's own rifle? Is it possible to take a un-matched bracket install it on a rifle and have no angle of deviation over different distances?
    I am looking at a unmatched No4 T for sale later this week and it made me think of these questions. It's a M47C 1945 and the finish is like a thick baked on paint, not suncorrite. I know I have seen that type of finish before...is this any reason to be concerned?
    It's getting late here now...hopefully my questions about the bracket don't embarrass me too much but I never fully understood that one!!!!
    Your input and knowledge...is always appreciated, thanks!!
    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.

  2. Thank You to bros For This Useful Post:


Similar Threads

  1. Peters Laidlers Idea.
    By read6737 in forum The Watering Hole OT (Off Topic) Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-21-2015, 01:44 PM
  2. An Armourer's Perspective: .303 No. 4 (T) Sniper Rifle and the H&H Connection
    By mjolnir2 in forum The Lee Enfield Knowledge Library Collectors Forum
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 03-01-2015, 05:45 AM
  3. new WW II sniper book
    By superbee in forum Book and Video Review Corner
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-26-2011, 07:50 PM
  4. Working The Rossi Gallery Rifle, from American Gunsmith's Book of the Rifle
    By Newsfeed Hound in forum The Watering Hole OT (Off Topic) Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-10-2010, 04:00 PM
  5. Mauser Sniper Rifle Question
    By Valkyrie45 in forum Mauser Rifles
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-15-2009, 12:46 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts