Printable View
When Enfield produced 7.62mm conversions of the No.4 action, I believe that they carried out internal machining operations on the body to accommodate the new 7.62mm magazine (CR 141A) particularly around the area where the hardened ejector lip of the magazine is located.
Does anyone have any information on this? How much metal was removed from where?
There is a drawing of the machining required in The Lee- Enfield page 259. This info was provided by Pete the Pom (Peter Laidler) I am sure he will fill you in more when he see's the post.
Myles
Small Arms Identification Series-No. 18 7.62mm L42A1 Sniper, L39A1, L392A & Lee-Enfield Conversions by Ian Skennerton. Has a very detailed drawing of the required modification to the mag well.
Thanks for that plug Bearclaw, but I want them to buy and read the books. Owning a Lee Enfield is a bit like owning a Norton motorbike or MG car. Without the user handbooks and workshop manuals, you're out on a limb
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
I think many folk jump onto the internet forums to AVOID buying and studying the books! Or maybe that's just being mean.
Some books ARE rather better written and organized, but that's another matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmoore
The difference between a dabbler and a mature collector is the lengths a collector will go to obtain reference materials/books and travel to shows, museums and the willingness to question anything appearing on the internet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmoore
Many thanks for the direction, gentlemen, now I know where to look. Although I have a modest collection of books which includes tomes by Skennerton, EGB Reynolds, Ezell, Musgrave, Collector Grade and various others, it doesn't, unfortunately, include the two mentioned.
I'm a shooter not a collector and the enquiry was to find out how to get my 7.62 No.4 hybrid to eject properly.
Regarding the ejection, you can get away with not modifying the magazine well on some rifles - but not all. But you won't get away with the standard extractor as it's not configured to a) give sufficient primary extraction and b) after full extraction, press the extracted case to the left so that it strikes the inbuilt ejector of the magazine. You could also put a new extractor spring in while you're doing it!
Thank you for the comments, Peter. The extractor is a 7.62 one but your hints caused me to take another careful look at the bolt head area on this rifle (which has a 1944 BSA Mk.1 body) and directly compare it with my Envoy which has always ejected vigorously although being a target rifle, doesn't really need it as much as one being used as a sporter.
The extractor spring is well tensioned but I did notice that the distance between the inner face of the extractor and the bolt face on the poor ejecting rifle is greater than on the Envoy when the claw is sitting firmly against the bolt head (no, there's no debris under the claw).
On the Envoy the available distance is pretty much equal to the average case rim thickness so holds it snugly, whereas on the problem rifle the additional distance allows the case to end float by about 30 thou which means that the case is only loosely held and isn't being biased to the left as it moves rearwards out of the chamber. This rifle doesn't seem to suffer from hard extraction despite losing that 30 thou of primary extraction.
As there's no fore and aft adjustment of the extractor position available, the only solution I can see is to find a selection of extractors and selectively fit them for a snug case grip. Is that how it's done?
The answer is that from that answer, you have a repro 7.62mm extractor fitted. These were flawed (as were their magazines.....). While they looked like the real McCoy, alas, they weren't the same