Could you dive into the thread 'another butchery' for a minute? We've had some posts about the lower height on the rear sight mount and I'm interested in your comments, thanks R
Printable View
Could you dive into the thread 'another butchery' for a minute? We've had some posts about the lower height on the rear sight mount and I'm interested in your comments, thanks R
There was a thread several months ago and a photo of a No4 with the backsight axis pin hole bored some .040" or so LOWER. This meant that the backsight couldn't be folded. The owner suggested that '....maybe it just escaped the examiner at the factory'
Several others, including me said that this suggestion was an absolute impossibility for a million reasons, including the fact that you'd never zero it in a zillion years, even of you had a supply of -.0900" foresights!.
I just wondered whether the owner/forumer ever got to the bottom of it! As I said, this axis hole was critical in some subsequent factory operations so never in a million years did it leave the factory like that.
Perhaps you could cut and paste this answer onto the thread of your choice RJ. Thanks.
It's for this reason that anyone who has a backsight-earless No4 rifle will have to be aware that if he's about to embark on a build-up by re-welding on new ears, then be aware that the datum for the axis pin hole is from the centre line of the boltway in the body and not some other point taken at random from your mates rifle...........................
There must be a number of no1mk6 A marked actions around the place, it makes me wonder just how armorers dealt with this problem, as I bet every single one has this low slung issue. If the first sight was damaged/lost then any replacement was an issue, except perhaps to put on a 300/600 and leave it as a non folding sight, which is how my rifle came.
PS There's a new addition to the New Zealand drivers license test; http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbo...n_version5.swf
0.205 secondsQuote:
Originally Posted by RJW NZ
lol, I sure didn't